Medford Public Schools
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
REPORT OF FINDINGS
Dates of Onsite Visit: May 23-June 3, 2005
Date of Draft Report: August 23, 2005
Due Date for Comments: September 16, 2005
Date of Final Report: January 6, 2006
Action Plan Due: February 27, 2006
Department of Education Onsite Team Members:
Donna Feinberg-Chairperson
Karen DeCoster
Ramona Foster
Gary Gomes
Doreen Iovanna
Marnie Jain
Jean Jonker
Jenna Mancini
Kathy McArdle
Lindsey McGovern
Janis McManus
Juan Tapia
Elizabeth Young
Neil Doherty-Safety Specialist MA DOS
K.P. Marshall & Associates, Financial Auditors
David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
Medford Public Schools
Table of Contents
OVERVIEW OF REVIEW PROCEDURES
REPORT INTRODUCTION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DEFINITION OF TERMS
COMPONENT I: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS
3
6
8
16
18
SPECIAL EDUCATION ......................................................................................................................................... 19
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION ......................................................................................................... 30
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION ..................................................................................................................... 32
COMPONENT II: STUDENT IDENTIFICATION AND PLACEMENT
33
SPECIAL EDUCATION ......................................................................................................................................... 34
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION .......................................................................................... 41
TITLE 1 ................................................................................................................................................................... 46
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION ......................................................................................................... 47
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION ..................................................................................................................... 48
COMPONENT III: PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT 52
SPECIAL EDUCATION ......................................................................................................................................... 53
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION .......................................................................................... 59
TITLE 1 ................................................................................................................................................................... 61
SAFE AND DRUG FREE SCHOOLS .................................................................................................................... 62
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION ......................................................................................................... 64
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION ..................................................................................................................... 65
COMPONENT IV: CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION 67
SPECIAL EDUCATION ......................................................................................................................................... 68
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION .......................................................................................... 76
TITLE 1 ................................................................................................................................................................... 79
SAFE AND DRUG FREE SCHOOLS .................................................................................................................... 81
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION ......................................................................................................... 81
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION ..................................................................................................................... 86
COMPONENT V: STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES
89
SPECIAL EDUCATION ......................................................................................................................................... 90
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION .......................................................................................... 95
TITLE 1 ................................................................................................................................................................. 101
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................... 102
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 2 of 152
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION ................................................................................................................... 103
COMPONENT VI: FACULTY, STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION 105
SPECIAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 106
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION ........................................................................................ 110
TITLE 1 ................................................................................................................................................................. 111
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................... 112
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION ................................................................................................................... 112
COMPONENT VII: SCHOOL FACILITIES 114
SPECIAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 115
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION ........................................................................................ 115
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................... 116
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION ................................................................................................................... 117
COMPONENT VIII: PROGRAM PLAN AND EVALUATION
118
SPECIAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 119
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION ........................................................................................ 119
TITLE 1 ................................................................................................................................................................. 121
SAFE AND DRUG FREE SCHOOLS .................................................................................................................. 124
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................... 125
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION ................................................................................................................... 127
COMPONENT IX: RECORD KEEPING
128
SPECIAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 129
TITLE 1 ................................................................................................................................................................. 131
SAFE AND DRUG FREE SCHOOLS .................................................................................................................. 137
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION ....................................................................................................... 138
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION ................................................................................................................... 140
APPENDIX I: 142
NUTRITION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES ...................................................................................................... 143
APPENDIX II:147
SCHOOL DISTRICT PROFILE INFORMATION ............................................................................................................. 148
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 2 of 152
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
Medford Public Schools
OVERVIEW OF REVIEW PROCEDURES
As one part of its Accountability System, the Department of Education oversees local compliance with
education requirements through the Coordinated Program Review System (CPR). All reviews include the
following selected requirements:
 special education under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA-97), and
M.G.L. Chapter 71B (Chapter 766 of the Acts of 1972);
 federal civil rights requirements under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal
Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990,
together with related state requirements under M.G.L. Chapter 76, Section 5 (Chapter 622 of the
Acts of 1971) and other Massachusetts General Laws;
 targeted standards from the Board of Education’s Physical Restraint regulations (603 CMR
46.00);
 targeted standards from the Board of Education’s Student Learning Time regulations (603 CMR
27.00);
 targeted standards from the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance
Improvements Act of 2001 (included in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001); and
 provisions of M.G.L. c. 71A, the state law that governs the provision of education to limited
English proficient students. Note that due to the voters’ approval in 2002 of an initiative petition
entitled “Question 2,” M.G.L. c. 71A has been significantly amended. Under the amended
Chapter 71A, limited English proficient students, now referred to as “English learners,” must be
provided instruction in sheltered English immersion or two-way bilingual programs unless they
have received a waiver. As a result of this change in the law, the Department’s Coordinated
Program Review standards under Chapter 71A were significantly revised for the 2003-2004
school year. All districts that enroll limited English proficient students will be reviewed using
these updated standards during the 2004-2005 school year.
Additional program areas reviewed during the Coordinated Program Review visits in selected districts
may include:
 Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, including other related grants
funded by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001;
 Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act;
 Career and Technical Education requirements under the federal Perkins Vocational and Applied
Technology Education Act and M.G.L. c. 74;
 Innovative assistance programs funded under Title V of the No Child Left Behind Act; and
 Nutrition Programs and Services.
The Department’s 2004-2005 schedule of Coordinated Program Reviews is posted on the Department’s
web site at <<http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/schedule.html>>. The statewide six-year
Program Review cycle together with the Department’s Mid-cycle Special Education follow-up
monitoring schedule is posted at <<http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/6yrcycle.html>>.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 3 of 152
Coordinated Program Review Elements
Team:
Depending upon the size of a school district and the number of program areas to be
reviewed, a team of two to eight Department staff members together with any
necessary outside consultants conducts a Coordinated Program Review over two to ten days
in a school district or charter school.
Scope:
Fifty-five school districts and charter schools are scheduled to receive visits in school year
2004-2005. All school districts and charter schools in the Commonwealth are monitored
through the Department's Coordinated Program Review system on a six-year cycle with an
additional mid-cycle special education follow-up visit.
Content:
The Program Review criteria encompass the required elements for the specific
program areas. In the case of special education, the elements selected for the 2004-2005
reviews contain, at a minimum, those required by the federal Office for Special
Education Programs (OSEP) and revised requirements included under IDEA-97 as
described in the Department's Special Education Advisories. Additionally, the 2004- 2005
reviews incorporate state special education requirements as adopted by the Board of
Education and effective on December 20, 2000. The Program Review compliance criteria
selected in all of the regulated program areas are those that are most closely aligned with the
goals of the Massachusetts Education Reform Act of 1993, and intended to promote high
standards and achievement for all students.
Report:
The Department's report is based on a review of written documentation and data regarding the
operation of the district's programs, together with information gathered through the following
Department program review methods:

Interviews of administrative, instructional, and support staff across all grade levels.

Interviews of parent advisory council (PAC) representatives and other interviews as
requested by persons from the general public.

Student record reviews in the program areas of special education, English learner
education (c. 71A), Career and Technical Education, and Section 504 (student
accommodation plans). A representative sample of student records is selected by the
Department. Student records are examined by the onsite team using standard Department
student record review procedures to make determinations regarding the implementation
of procedural and programmatic requirements. Parents of students with disabilities
whose files are selected for the record review are sent a survey that solicits information
regarding their experiences with the district’s implementation of special education
programs, related services and procedural requirements.

Classroom and facilities observation. The onsite team visits a sample of instructional
classrooms and other school facilities used in the delivery of programs and services to
determine general levels of compliance with program requirements.

Collaborative programs and services. Where the district is a member of a collaborative
approved by the Department of Education and is a site for programs or services operated
by the collaborative, interviews, student record review, and classroom and facility
observations are conducted for the collaborative.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 4 of 152
An Executive Summary and detailed findings for each program area describe determinations of the
Department about the implementation status of each requirement (criterion) reviewed.
Response:
In the Final Report the team notes those criteria that it found to be substantially
implemented or whose implementation it found to be commendable. Where criteria are
found not to be implemented fully, the local district or charter school must propose
corrective actions to bring those areas into compliance with the respective statutes or
regulations. School districts and charter schools must demonstrate effective
resolution of noncompliance identified by the Department as soon as possible but in
no case later than one year from the issuance of the Department’s Final Program
Review Report.
The Department believes that the Coordinated Program Review process is a positive experience and that
the Final Report is a helpful planning document for the continued development and improvement of
programs and services in each school district, charter school, and educational collaborative.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 5 of 152
REPORT INTRODUCTION
A fourteen-member Massachusetts Department of Education team visited Medford Public Schools during
the week of May 23, 2005 to evaluate the implementation of selected criteria in the program areas Special
Education, Civil Rights, Title I, English Learner Education (c. 71A), Career and Technical Education,
Safe and Drug Free Schools and Nutrition. The team appreciated the opportunity to interview staff and
parents, to observe classroom facilities and to review the programs underway in the district. The onsite
team would like to commend the following areas that were brought to its attention and that it believes
have a significant and positive impact on the delivery of educational services for students enrolled in the
Medford Public Schools. These areas are as follows:
The district demonstrates a strong proactive commitment to creating and developing in-district
options to allow students, ages three through twenty-one, to remain in the community, and to
providing support services to families and schools through collaborations with community
agencies, local organizations, businesses and universities.
There are ongoing initiatives to afford all students in the school communities, inclusionary
programming in the least restrictive educational environment. The district demonstrates excellent
practices in the oversight and monitoring of the IEP process for students placed in out-of-district
placements.
The district implements quality alternative middle and high school programs: the Fulton Heights
School and the Curtis Tufts School, through a partnership with Tufts University.
Strong community partnerships and support contribute to the 100% placement rate for students
enrolled in Vocational Technical Education (VTE) programs. Medford Vocational Technical
High School demonstrates a commitment to community service learning. Students are required to
provide 60 hours of community service (15 hours per year) as a graduation requirement.
Procedures and referrals are in place to ensure that homeless children and youth enrolled in the
schools receive all services for which they are eligible. Health care services are provided to
homeless families in the community through the district’s collaboration with health care and
medical agencies.
Medford Public Schools participates at an exemplary level with other agencies in activities that
include student, parent and teacher surveys, focus groups, program development and
implementation, writing grants, evaluation and meetings regarding the prevalence of drugs and
violence in the community. An exemplary partnership exists in the district’s collaboration with
local agencies implementing local, federal and state programs for drug-abuse and violence
prevention for the schools and community
The district has very clear expectations against violence and the illegal use of drugs with
appropriate, clear, consistent and well-enforced consequences in place for violation of policies.
Anti-drug and anti-abuse programs and activities are crafted on scientifically based research and
evaluation that demonstrate evidence of program effectiveness in reducing and preventing drug
use, violence and disruptive behavior among youth. There is an exemplary process in place to
determine the current level of substance abuse and violence among the student population in the
community.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 6 of 152
Some of the commendations noted above are repeated within the body of the Department’s report under
the appropriate compliance criteria.
The Department is submitting the following Coordinated Program Review Report containing findings
made pursuant to this onsite visit. In preparing this report, the team reviewed extensive written
documentation regarding the operation of the district's programs, together with information gathered by
means of following Department program review methods:







Interviews of 32 administrative staff.
Interviews of 133 teaching and support services staff across all levels.
Interviews of 2 parent advisory council (PAC) representatives.
Interviews as requested by persons from the general public.
Student record reviews: A sample of 91 student records was selected by the Department. Student
records were first examined by local staff, whose findings were then verified by the onsite team using
standard Department of Education student record review procedures to make determinations
regarding the implementation of procedural and programmatic requirements.
Parent surveys: 54 parents of students with disabilities were sent surveys that solicited information
regarding their experiences with the district’s implementation of special education programs, related
services and procedural requirements. 29 of these parent surveys were returned to the Department of
Education for review by the onsite team.
Observation of classrooms and other facilities. A sample of 49 instructional classrooms and other
school facilities used in the delivery of programs and services was visited to determine general levels
of compliance with program requirements.
The report includes findings in the program areas reviewed organized under nine components . These
components are listed in the executive summary on the following pages. The findings in each program
area explain the “ratings, ”determinations by the team about the implementation status of the criteria
reviewed. The ratings indicate those criteria that were found by the team to be substantially
“Implemented” or implemented in a “Commendable” manner. (Refer to the “Definition of Terms”
section of the report.) Where criteria were found to be either "Partially Implemented" or "Not
Implemented," the district or charter school must propose to the Department corrective actions to bring
those areas into compliance with the controlling statute or regulation. In some instances the team may
have rated a requirement as “Implemented” but made a specific comment on the district’s implementation
methods that also may require response from the district or charter school.
Districts are expected to incorporate the corrective action into their district and school improvement
plans, including their professional development plans.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 7 of 152
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Medford Public Schools
The following summary synthesizes the findings for criteria included in the Coordinated Program Review
as they respond to essential questions that the Department has formulated for each of the components of
the report. Note that a more detailed discussion of the onsite team’s findings, together with the specific
legal standards for each program area included in this review, follows this summary.
Component I: Assessment of Students
Has the district implemented an assessment system that uses appropriate instruments, is conducted
according to the specified timelines, and covers the appropriate content areas to determine instructional
needs of students?
The district uses assessment instruments that are current, valid and examined to ensure that
they are free of bias. Appropriate credentialed and certified personnel conduct evaluations.
The district substantially adheres to the IEP process and procedures regarding the completion
of evaluations and the provision of in-district and out-of-district IEPs to parents/guardians.
Annual reviews and re-evaluations are conducted within the mandated timelines. There are
inconsistencies in the type of documentation that is provided to parents at the conclusion of
Team meetings when the proposed IEP is not given. The district has assigned an Evaluation
Team Leader to each school building to establish system-wide consistency and compliance in
the implementation of the in-district IEP process and procedures. However, the selection of
assessments for initial and re-evaluations and the completed assessment reports do not always
address the specific areas of the student’s need and suspected disability.
IEP Teams at the preschool, elementary and middle school levels, including both alternative
schools, have the required Team participants and have a person in attendance with the
authority to commit the resources of the district. However, at the secondary level, the high
school and vocational school do not always have a regular education teacher in attendance.
Transition services are considered by IEP Teams for students 14 years or older with students
either in attendance at Team meetings or in some manner, participating in the IEP process to
ensure their input. Progress reports are issued to parents/guardians according to the report
card cycle. However, the progress reports do not always address the progress or lack of
progress made towards the annual IEP goals. When students were not making progress,
evidence that the IEP Team had convened to address the lack of progress was inconsistent.
All students with disabilities participate in the MCAS or the appropriate alternate assessment
as determined by the IEP Team.
In the area of English Learner Education, limited-English proficient students (LEP) are
annually assessed for their level of language proficiency by qualified staff. All LEP students
participate in the MCAS with appropriate accommodations.
In the area of Career and Technical Education, the district does not use academic and
career/vocational assessments for planning students’ programs.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 8 of 152
Component II: Student Identification and Program Placement
Has the district followed procedures for student identification and placement into the program according
to the criteria specified in regulations?
The district continues to demonstrate a commitment to offering students a wide range of
programs and services, which promotes inclusion and integration in the least restrictive
educational environment and creates more options for meeting all students’ needs in a
diversified learning environment. The schools have a strong partnership with community
agencies, hospitals and the police, for outreach and the provision of support services to
students and families. However, the vocational school does not always ensure that students
with disabilities are provided with full access to the general curriculum in the least restrictive
setting.
The district adheres to the current structured learning time requirements. IEP Teams consider
a student’s need for an extended school year service or program. There is a description of
multiple, objective, educationally related criteria for each grade served for those students
entering Kindergarten to grade 5 .
Preschool and kindergarten screenings are conducted to identify children and students in
need of special education services and/or programs. The district has established a strong
partnership with Early Intervention Programs. This has resulted in a solid transition process
for children moving into preschool programs and ensures that services are in place when the
eligible child turns three.
IEPS are developed with all the required elements. IEP goals, in most cases, are well written
and specific to the student’s area of educational need at the preschool through middle school
levels, including the alternative schools. However, the IEP goals at the secondary level,
specifically the high school and the vocational school, are not always measurable and do not
always pertain to the student’s need for specialized instruction. IEPs at the vocational school
do not always include goals specific to the career/vocational and technical program, when
necessary and appropriate. Students with social-emotional and behavioral needs who are
placed in inclusion classrooms, do not always have IEP goals to address behaviors, when
necessary and appropriate.
In the area of civil rights, an exemplary level of procedures and referrals are in place that
ensure that homeless children and youth enrolled in the schools receive all services for which
they are eligible. There is a strong collaboration with the nurses, Board of Health, medical
agencies and hospitals in providing health care to the homeless families in Medford.
Limited English Proficient (LEP) students are appropriately identified and provided with
English language support programs through “sheltered English immersion” classrooms. The
content objectives are clear and students are actively participating and engaged in the
curriculum. However, there are no formal exit criteria in place across the system, in order to
determine when students are ready to leave the English Language Learner programs. Some
schools are conducting transition meetings for students, but there is a lack of documentation
regarding the procedures implemented to re-designate a student from LEP to Formerly
English Proficient (FLEP).
Students placed in resource rooms and students in SEI classrooms at the middle and high
school do not always have full and equal access to science and tech labs and to
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 9 of 152
exploratory/elective classes.
In the career/vocational and technical education programs, there is no evidence that students
with limited English proficiency, economically disadvantaged students or nontraditional
students are appropriately identified for and/or receive adequate support services.
Component III: Parental Involvement
Has the district ensured that parents are notified in the appropriate language and are involved in
decisions regarding their children's programs and services? Where appropriate, does the district involve
community representatives in shaping programs?
Parents actively participate in the entire IEP process throughout the school year. Parents
have high attendance at Team meetings. The district does whatever is necessary to ensure that
parents can attend or participate in the decision making process in an alternate manner.
Notices are sent to parents regarding evaluations, parental consent and Team meetings
according to federally mandated timelines. There is no formal mechanism for teachers and
evaluators to obtain updated information on the type of language assistance that a
parent/guardian requires in having full access to the IEP process and procedures. There is
inconsistency in the translation of the mandated IEP documents for evaluations and the IEP
process.
Currently the district is re-evaluating the roles and responsibilities of the district and the
special education Parent Advisory Council(PAC) and is seeking to develop a more effective
mechanism for the PAC to act as representative for all parents of special education students
in the district.
The Title I Parent Coordinator shares extensive resources with the parents of Title I students
to enable them to improve their children’s achievement. The district should become more
involved and supportive of many of the required parent involvement activities.
In the area of civil rights, the district needs to ensure that each school has updated
information on the type of language assistance required by parents or guardians, whose
primary language is not English, to ensure that parents are receiving information in a
manner that they can understand.
The Homeless Education Liaison is implementing the requirements to fully inform and involve
parents and guardians of homeless students in their child’s education and to collaborate with
state and community agencies, and the schools, to ensure the provision of education and
related services to homeless children and youth.
In the area of Safe and Drug Free Schools (SDFS), the Medford SDFS Coordinator maintains
consultation in a timely and meaningful way with community agencies, parents, students,
schools, police and fire departments, school staff, the medical profession and groups/agencies
with interest or expertise in drug and violence prevention, in the development and
implementation of the Safe and Drug Free Schools programs and activities. Some of these
excellent collaborations with community agencies have provided additional funding, and
programs and activities in drug and violence prevention, for students, parents and staff.
In the area of Career and Technical Education, the General Advisory Committee, program
advisory committees and parents/guardians have limited involvement in the development,
implementation and evaluation of career and technical programs. Information regarding
career and technical programs is not provided in languages other than English.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 10 of 152
There is no formal mechanism in place for outreach and to involve parents/guardians of
English Language Learners in matters pertaining to their children’s education. Teachers in
individual ELE programs are highly involved with their students’ parents. There was evidence
of ongoing communications and contact with the parents and the provision of assistance or
notification when necessary and requested by the parents/guardians.
Component IV: Curriculum and Instruction
Does the district hold all students to high expectations and standards? Are programs designed to
maximize student performance and students’ participation in the general curriculum? Is curriculum
throughout the districts’ programs aligned with the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks? Has the
district provided for coordination across program areas?
The district is committed to the continuous development and expansion of a general
curriculum and continuum of services from grades Kindergarten-12 that promote a high
quality standards-based curriculum and is responsive to the diverse learning needs of the
student population. The general curriculum is aligned with the Massachusetts Curriculum
Frameworks and the English Learner Education (ELE) curriculum is based upon the
Massachusetts English Language Proficiency Benchmarks and Outcomes.
The Medford Early Education Program (MEEP) offers several program options, including a
fully integrated developmentally-based classroom model and a full spectrum of related
services, to serve young children three and four years of age.
The district has excellent procedures in place to monitor the implementation of IEPs for
students placed in out-of-district settings.
The school year schedules adhere to the state requirements for structured learning time for
students from Kindergarten through high school. All students have equal opportunity to
participate in extracurricular activities.
Concerns exist regarding the available resources and the level of staff awareness and
knowledge in the use of assistive technology software and equipment within the K-12
curriculum. IEP Teams do not always consider the student’s need for assistive technology.
The district adheres to the class size and age span requirements at the elementary level, but
do not fully monitor these requirements at the high school level.
In the ELE program, the district needs to review the make-up of instructional groupings as
some classrooms have students of differing ages with mixed proficiency levels, rather than
similar proficiency levels. In addition, procedures need to be in place system-wide for
implementing parental notification and declining entry to an English language support
program.
The Title I teachers provide reading and language arts support at the elementary level.
Title I services are provided in regular education classes using current and scientificallybased instructional strategies to help maximize student achievement.
The SDFS coordinator provides coordination with all Program Directors/Coordinators,
Administrators and other members of the community to address specific needs in the
development and implementation of all programs and activities for students, staff and parents.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 11 of 152
In general, Medford Vocational Technical High School (MVTHS) students are not held to the
same rigorous standards and expectations as are students enrolled at Medford High School
(MHS). For example, MVTHS students are required to select one of two curricula: the career
curriculum for those interested in employment after high school, or the dual curriculum for
students interested in continuing their program at a postsecondary technical college. Shops
and academic classrooms have insufficient technology to assist students with technical skill
attainment and academic success.
Component V: Student Support Services
Has the district ensured that all students have equal access to programs and services? Does the district
provide support to students who need it?
The district uses an integrated support services approach, from preschool to high school , to
unify the focus of service delivery for the individual student with the classroom curriculum
experiences across the school day. IEP Teams consider a student’s needs for related services
and special transportation. The district offers a variety of program options for students
requiring therapeutic interventions, which combine school-based services with increased
intensive services provided by Wediko Children’s Services or short-term intervention from
Tri-City or Arbor Mental Health Services.
There are excellent programs within the district for students requiring substantially separate
or alternative programming for behavioral and/or social-emotional disorders. However, IEP
Teams do not always consider goals and/or interventions, such as the need for counseling
services, for students with behavioral and/or social-emotional needs who are placed in full or
partial inclusion settings.
The district implements the federally mandated procedures regarding suspension and
violations of the school’s discipline code for students with disabilities and for students not yet
determined eligible for special education services. There is a process in place for tracking and
monitoring suspensions for all students.
In the area of civil rights, the district must review its school handbooks to develop
comprehensive grievance procedures regarding the required steps and timeframe for
implementation. In addition, the codes of conduct do not clearly address the consequences
that would result from violations of the discipline code. There is no formal mechanism in
place for the translation of school handbooks and the code of conduct for parents/guardians
whose primary language is other than English and who require or request written and/or oral
language assistance.
In the ELE program area, students have access to nonacademic and extracurricular activities.
However, there is no process in place for students at the middle and high school to receive
information, about activities from the guidance department, in a language that they can
understand. The district also does not have formal procedures in place to track and monitor
the provision of supports and the progress of students exiting from the ELE program for a
two-year period.
In the area of Title I, the students at the eligible public and private schools receive academic
support to help them meet the challenging curriculum. All students who are eligible have
access to the Title I services.
At Medford Vocational Technical High School, not all students in special education programs
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 12 of 152
have full access to the CVTE programs available. Students who self-identified on their
admission applications that their home language was other than English, are neither assessed
nor provided support services in their academic or technical courses at the vocational school.
Overall, support services are limited and inequitable in comparison with Medford High
School.
Component VI: Faculty, Staff and Administration
Does the district maintain licensed staff in the specific program areas, provide supervision of aides and
tutors, and provide ongoing professional development? Are program leadership and oversight effective?
Are the district’s personnel procedures non-discriminatory and does it seek to recruit employees from all
groups?
All special education and related service personnel are appropriately certified and licensed in
their area of expertise. There is a high level of informal collaboration and networking among
the regular and special education teachers and paraprofessional staff. However, there are
limited opportunities for regular and special education teachers, English language teachers
and paraprofessionals to be involved in cross-curricular activities through professional
development activities and workshops. All teachers in English language classrooms are
appropriately certified and qualified to provide instruction.
The district has provided quality professional development to professional staff. However, the
review team noted a need for increased training in the identification of disabilities, classroom
application of instructional strategies and accommodations for different disabilities and
diverse learning styles, implementation of behavioral strategies in general education
classroom and second language acquisition.
The specific training in roles and responsibilities and the provision of regular supervision of
the paraprofessional staff varies throughout the district. Some paraprofessionals, especially at
the high school and vocational school, are delivering and sometimes, designing instruction.
In addition, paraprofessionals do not have access to professional development opportunities
on an ongoing basis.
The district has implemented a Teacher Assistance Team process that is firmly in place at the
elementary and middle school levels regarding the provision of instructional support
interventions to students in general education. However, the process is not being implemented
at the vocational school or at the high school, where the process is functioning as a referral to
special education, rather than an intervention process.
The Title I staff and teachers have met the licensure requirements. The teachers interviewed
have a passion for teaching and demonstrate a genuine interest in student academic
achievement. There is a sharing of resources both tangible and intangible.
Not all vocational technical education (VTE) teachers in Chapter 74-approved vocational
technical education programs are appropriately certified. One Algebra/MCAS preparation
teacher is not certified to teach mathematics. (CTE)
Component VII: School Facilities
Does the district maintain accessible facilities that are conducive to learning, facilitate integration, and
provide equal opportunity for students to achieve?
The district has a school at every level that provides full accessibility. The space provided for
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 13 of 152
the middle and high school special education resource room and the middle school ELE
classroom are not comparable with spaces provided for regular education. In addition, the
location of the life skills program at the McGlynn Elementary school does not maximize the
integration of the students with their peer group in the general education program.
During the review, a safety expert contracted by the Department carried out a safety
inspection of Medford Vocational High School’s shops and related facilities. The safety
expert identified 68 serious safety hazards that will require immediate corrective action.
Serious hazards are defined as those that can cause an accident or health hazard exposure
resulting in death or serious harm. Of the 68, the expert identified items 1, 2, 3, 14, 21, 27,
29, 30, 31 and 32 to be approaching imminent danger to students and staff. Safety training is
not provided to all staff and there is no school-wide Safety Plan. None of the 12 shops
inspected were in full compliance with applicable Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) regulations.
Jeffrey Wheeler, State Director of Career/Vocational Technical Education sent the report
prepared by the safety expert to Superintendent Belson and Principal Mahoney on July 5,
2005. The district must begin rectifying the hazards immediately. All safety hazards must be
corrected prior to the opening of the 2005-2006 school year.(CTE)
Component VIII: Program Plan and Evaluation
Does the district evaluate its programs in accordance with regulatory requirements? Does it use the
results of its evaluations to improve programs? Do parents have opportunities for input on program
needs, program implementation, and program evaluation and improvement?
The district, through the work of the Medford Human Rights Commission and Racially
Balanced Advisory Committee, regularly track multicultural and multiracial efforts as
evidenced in the K-12 curriculum.
There is an annual review of Homeless Policies, K-12 programs and counseling materials to
ensure that they are free of bias and stereotypes. However, there is a need to develop a
formal mechanism to evaluate all aspects of the K-12 program in regards to the
nondiscrimination policy, as inconsistencies and inequities were noted in the area of
disproportionality, the implementation of the regular curricular requirements at the
secondary level for all students and the equitability of the resource room spaces at the
secondary level.
The Special Education Administrator meets regularly with the Special Education
Coordinators, Evaluation Team Leaders and staff to review and evaluate the effectiveness and
appropriateness of the special education programs and services system-wide. However, there
is no formal process or plan in place to regularly review the district’s programs and services,
or document the evaluation outcomes and the changes implemented as a result.
The district also does not have a process in place to conduct periodic evaluations of the
effectiveness of its English Learner Education program.
The Title I Program provides opportunities for administrators, professional staff, Title I
teachers/reading specialist and parents to assess the program through surveys. The Title I
program has changed some of its instructional focus based on the needs at each school.
Medford has an exemplary process in place to determine the current level of substance abuse
and violence problems among students in the community. The district has established goals,
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 14 of 152
measurable objectives and activities for its prevention programs that address the needs
identified by the objective analysis. Programs are crafted on scientifically based research and
evaluation that demonstrate evidence of program effectiveness in reducing and preventing
drug use and disruptive behaviors among youth. Components that have been implemented
include: Second Step, Bullying Program, Peer Mediation, Smoking Cessation, Gay Straight
Alliance, Teen Dating Violence, and SADD. The district has an evaluation process in place to
measure progress toward achieving its goals and objectives in these programs. There is
evidence that evaluation results are used to refine, improve and strengthen the local programs
and activities and the SDFS program results are reported publicly on a consistent basis.
While placement data is used to evaluate program success, there is no additional system of
evaluation of career/vocational technical programs.
Component IX: Record keeping
Does the District maintain required records and documentation for each program area? Are entitlement
grants appropriately designed, amended, and monitored? Does the district use federal grant funds in
accordance with statutory fund-use rules, including supplement not supplant provisions where
applicable? Does the district meet applicable maintenance of effort requirements?
The district implements the appropriate record keeping requirements in the area of special
education, regarding eligible students. Federal grants are designed by the appropriate
administrators and monitored to ensure full implementation.
Title I Programs’ grant, files and documentation are well maintained and complete. The
required records are in excellent order. The files and reports relating to the fiscal
requirements are complete and on file in the appropriate offices.
Appropriate accounting documentation, for the Safe and Drug Free Schools Community Act
grant, demonstrates that procedures are in place and approved budgets and amendments are
on file for fiscal years 2004 and 2005. Expenditures are strictly related to the intent of the
grant. Time distribution logs are maintained for individuals funded under SDFSCA funds.
Medford conveys a clear message that acts of violence and illegal drug use are wrong and
harmful. The set of assurances, schools discipline policies, security procedures and crisis
management plans all include the required information for keeping schools safe and drug
free.
The records of Limited English Proficient students do not contain all the required
documentation.
Records for students enrolled in career/vocational technical programs/courses are
incomplete. Several student records contain information of other students due to misfiling.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 15 of 152
DEFINITION OF TERMS
FOR THE RATING OF EACH COMPLIANCE CRITERION
Commendable
Any requirement or aspect of a requirement
implemented in an exemplary manner significantly
beyond the requirements of law or regulation.
Implemented
The requirement is substantially met.
Partially Implemented
The requirement, in one or several important aspects, is
not entirely met.
Not Implemented
The requirement is totally or substantially not met.
Not Applicable
The requirement does not apply to the school district or
charter school.
Several key areas of compliance with federal special education requirements have been highlighted in
SHADED TEXT in the Program Review Criteria. These highlighted areas are included in the
Massachusetts Continuous Improvement Plan (CIP) that is being used by the U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), to track over time this state’s compliance in
these key areas.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 16 of 152
School District: Medford Public Schools
SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE CRITERIA INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT
RECEIVING A COMMENDABLE RATING
FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Special
Education
SE 37
Safe and Drug
Free Schools
SDF 2, SDF 2A
SDF 5, SDF 7
Civil Rights
MOA 2C
MOA 6B
SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE CRITERIA INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT
REQUIRING CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT
in response to the following
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT FINDINGS
PARTIALLY
IMPLEMENTED
NOT IMPLEMENTED
OTHER CRITERIA REQUIRING
RESPONSE
Special Education(SE):
1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 13, 18A, 18B, 19,
20, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 32, 33, 35,
40, 41, 43, 48, 49, 50, 53, 54,
55, 56
Civil Rights (MOA):
1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10A, 11A, 12A, 13,
14, 15, 23
Career/Vocational and Technical
Education ( CTE): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,
16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22
MOA 18A , 25
CTE 18, 23
English Learner Education
(ELE):
4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15,
16, 17, 18
Nutrition (NS): 1, 3, 4, 5, 6
NOTE THAT ALL OTHER CRITERIA REVIEWED BY THE DEPARTMENT THAT ARE NOT
MENTIONED ABOVE HAVE RECEIVED AN “IMPLEMENTED” RATING.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 17 of 152
COMPONENT I: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS
The criteria in this component examine whether the District has implemented an
assessment system that uses appropriate instruments, conducted according to the
specified timelines and covering the appropriate content areas to determine
instructional needs of students for the program areas listed below:


Special Education (Report Issues # SE 1-14)
Career and Technical Education (Report Issues # CTE 1-3)

English Learner Education (Report Issues # ELE 1-2)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 18 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
SPECIAL EDUCATION
I. ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS
Legal Standard
SE 1
j.
Assessments are appropriately selected and interpreted for students referred
for evaluation
1. Tests and other evaluation materials are:
a. validated
b. administered and interpreted by trained individuals
c. tailored to assess specific areas of educational need
d. selected and administered to reflect aptitude and achievement levels
e. as free as possible from cultural and linguistic bias
f. provided in the student's native language or other mode of communication
where feasible
g. not the sole criterion for determining an appropriate educational program
h. not only those designed to provide a single general intelligence quotient
i.
are selected and administered to ensure that when a test is administered to
a student with impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills, the test results
accurately reflect the student's aptitude or achievement level or the other
factors the test purports to measure
technically sound instruments that may assess the relative contribution of
cognitive and behavioral factors, in addition to physical or developmental
factors
2. In interpreting evaluation data and making decisions, the district:
a. uses information from a variety of sources to gather relevant functional
and developmental information, including information provided by the
parent
b. ensures that information obtained from these sources is considered
c. ensures that the placement decision conforms with placement in the least
restrictive environment
d. includes information related to enabling the student to be involved in and
progress in the general curriculum
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
28.04
34 CFR 300.532, 300.535
28.05
34 CFR 104.35(b)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings: Documentation shows that there are a variety of tests available
for assessment purposes within the district. Student record review and interviews show that the
selection of assessments for initial and re-evaluations do not always adequately address the specific
areas of a student’s educational need and suspected disability. In the above cases, the evaluators tend
to use a standard battery of assessments for initial evaluations and reevaluations rather than selecting
assessments related to the suspected area(s) of disability and individualized to the student.
However, interviews indicate that a number of issues effect the staff’s ability to access the tests: time
constraints regarding actual time allocated to conduct an evaluation in all areas of suspected
disability; lack of knowledge regarding how to select appropriate tests to use as diagnostic tools for
different areas of suspected disability; and limited access to the tests available in the district.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 19 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 2
Required and optional assessments
1.
Required assessments: The following assessments are completed by
appropriately credentialed and trained specialists for each referred student:
a.
Assessment(s) in all areas related to the suspected disability
(ies) including consideration of any needed assistive
technology devices and services and/or instruction in braille.
b.
Educational assessment by a representative of the school
district, including a history of the student’s educational
progress in the general curriculum.
c.
Assessment by a teacher(s) with current knowledge
regarding the student’s specific abilities in relation to
learning standards of the Massachusetts Curriculum
Frameworks and the district curriculum, as well as an
assessment of the student’s attention skills, participation
behaviors, communication skills, memory, and social
relations with groups, peers, and adults.
d.
For a child being assessed to determine eligibility for
services at age three (3), an observation of the child’s
interactions in the child’s natural environment or early
intervention program is strongly encouraged together with
the use of current assessments from early intervention
Teams to avoid duplicate testing.
2.
Optional assessments: The Administrator of Special Education may
recommend or the parent may request one or more of the following:
a. A comprehensive health assessment by a physician that identifies
medical problems or constraints that may affect the student's
education. The school nurse may add additional relevant health
information from the student’s school health records.
b. A psychological assessment by a certified school psychologist,
licensed psychologist, or licensed educational psychologist,
including an individual psychological examination.
c. A home assessment that may be conducted by a nurse,
psychologist, social worker, guidance or adjustment counselor,
or teacher and includes information on pertinent family history
and home situation and may include a home visit, with the
agreement of the parent
3.
At the re-evaluation of a student, if the Team decides that no additional
assessments are needed to determine whether the student continues to be
eligible for special education, the school district recommends to the
student’s parents the following:
a.
that no further assessments are needed and the reasons for
this; and
b.
the right of such parents to request an assessment.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 20 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
State Regulations
28.04 (1) and (2)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
300.532; 300.346.(a)(2)(v)
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to SE 1 regarding 1(a).
In the area of re-evaluations, interviews indicate that the student’s progress is reviewed, but this
information is not always used to guide in the selection of appropriate assessment instruments for the
student’s re-evaluation. There is a tendency to re-administer the assessments that were previously
identified and completed for the student’s initial evaluation, rather than reviewing existing evidence of
achievement from a variety of sources, including but not limited to in-class work, and teacher
observations to further evaluate the areas of concern.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 3
Special requirements for determination of specific learning disabilities
When the district proposes to evaluate a child suspected of having a specific learning
disability, the following requirements are implemented:
a. Team membership: The district ensures the Team includes at a minimum the
parent, the child’s regular classroom teacher appropriate to the age of the child and at
least one person qualified to conduct individual diagnostic examinations of children.
b. Criteria for determining the existence of a specific learning disability:
1. the achievement is determined not to be commensurate with the age and
ability of the child;
2. a severe discrepancy exists in one or more areas between achievement and
intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, written
expression, basic reading skill and reading comprehension, mathematics
calculation and reasoning;
3. the severe discrepancy between ability and achievement is not resulting from
visual, hearing or motor impairment, mental retardation, emotional
disturbance or environmental, cultural or economic disadvantage.
c. Required observation of the child:
1. at least one Team member other than the child’s regular teacher observes the
child’s academic performance in the regular classroom setting;
2. if the child is less than school age, the observation is conducted in an
environment appropriate for a child of that age.
d. Written documentation of the Team’s determination of eligibility due to the
presence of a specific learning disability includes the following:
1. statement whether the child has a specific learning disability;
2. the basis for making the determination;
3. the relevant behavior noted during the observation of the child;
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 21 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
4. the relationship of that behavior to the child’s academic functioning;
5. the educationally relevant medical findings, if any;
6. statement whether there is a severe discrepancy between achievement and
ability that is not correctable without special education and/or related
services; and
7. the determination of the Team concerning the effects of environmental,
cultural, or economic disadvantage.
e. Required written certification of Team members:
Each Team member certifies in writing whether the report reflects his or her
conclusion. If not, the Team member submits a separate statement presenting his or
her conclusions.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.540-543
District Response Required: No
Not Rated
Department of Education Findings: Statutory requirements for the determination of specific
learning disabilities have been revised under the recently reauthorized IDEA 2004. Therefore, until
final implementing regulations have been adopted, the Department is not making findings related to
school district practices under this criterion.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 4
Reports of assessment results
1.
Each person conducting an assessment shall summarize in writing the
procedures employed, the results, and the diagnostic impression, and shall
define in detail and in educationally relevant and common terms, the
student’s needs, offering explicit means of meeting them. Assessors may
recommend appropriate types of placements, but shall not recommend
specific classrooms or schools.
2.
Summaries of assessments are completed prior to discussion by the Team
and, upon request, are made available to the parent at least two days in
advance of the Team discussion.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
28.04(2)(c)
300.532
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings: Student record review shows that there is not always sufficient
and/or consistent interpretation of assessment findings regarding how the student performed. In these
cases, assessment reports tend to explain the content of the assessments and report the scores rather
than reporting on the student’s performance or presenting educationally relevant findings and
recommendations that provide necessary information to the IEP Team regarding the student’s
educational needs.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 22 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 5
Participation in general State and district-wide assessment programs
1. All students with disabilities whose placements are funded by the district are
included in the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS)
and other district-wide assessment programs.
2. The district’s IEP Teams designate how each student will participate and, if
necessary, provide an alternate assessment.
3. The superintendent of a school district--or, for a public school program that
is not part of a school district, the equivalent administrator—
a. files an MCAS performance appeal for a student with a disability when the
student’s parent or guardian or the student, if 18 or over, requests it, provided that
the student meets the eligibility requirements for such an appeal;
b. obtains the consent of the parent or guardian or the student, if 18 or over,
for any MCAS performance appeal filed on behalf of a student with a
disability;
c. includes in the MCAS performance appeal, to the extent possible, the
required evidence of the student’s knowledge and skills in the subject at
issue.
State Requirements
Federal Requirements
St. 2003, c. 140;
34 CFR 300.138; 300.139
603 CMR 30.05(2),(3),(5)
District Response Required: No
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 6
Determination of transition services
1.
For a student who is 14 years of age, the Team considers the student’s
course of study in relation to the student’s future goals and document this in
the IEP.
2.
For a student who is 16 years of age, or younger if appropriate, the Team
includes in the IEP services that promote movement of the student from
school to post-school activities, including post-secondary education,
vocational training, integrated employment (including supported
employment), continuing and adult education, adult services, independent
living, or community participation.
3.
The transition services are based upon the student's needs, taking into
account the student's preferences and interests and includes specially
designed instruction, community experiences, the development of
employment or other post-school adult living objectives, and, if appropriate,
the acquisition of daily living skills and functional vocational evaluation.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 23 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
4.
For any student approaching graduation or the age of twenty-two, the Team
determines whether the student is likely to require continuing services from
adult human service agencies. In such circumstances, the Administrator of
Special Education makes a referral to the Bureau of Transitional Planning in
the Executive Office of Health and Human Services in accordance with the
requirements of M.G.L. c.71B, §12A-§12C (known as Chapter 688).
5.
In cases where the IEP included needed transition services and a
participating agency other than the school district fails to provide these
services, the Team reconvenes to identify alternative strategies to meet the
transition objectives.
6.
The district ensures that students age 14, or younger if appropriate, are
invited to and encouraged to attend part or all of Team meetings at which
transition services are discussed or proposed
State Requirements
Federal Requirements
M.G.L. Ch.71B, Sections 12A-C
34 CFR 300.344(b), 300.347
603 CMR 28.05(4)(c)
District Response Required: No
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 7
Transfer of parental rights at age of majority and student participation and
consent at the age of majority
1. One year prior to the student reaching age eighteen, the district informs the
student of his or her right at age 18 to make all decisions in relation to special
education programs and services.
2. Upon reaching the age of eighteen, the school district implements procedures to
obtain consent from the student to continue the student’s special education
program.
3. The district continues to send the parent written notices and information but will
no longer have decision-making authority, except as provided below.
(a)
If the parent has sought and received guardianship from a court of
competent jurisdiction, then the parent retains full decision-making
authority. The parent does not have authority to override any
decision or lack of decision made by the student who has reached
the age of majority unless the parent has sought or received
guardianship or other legal authority from a court of competent
jurisdiction
(b)
The student, upon reaching the age of majority and in the absence of
any court actions to the contrary, may choose to share decisionmaking with his or her parent (or other willing adult), including
allowing the parent to co-sign the IEP. Such choice is made in the
presence of the Team and is documented in written form. The
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 24 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
student’s choice prevails at any time that a disagreement occurs
between the adult student and the parent or other adult with whom
the student has shared decision-making
(c)
The student, upon reaching the age of majority and in the absence of
any court actions to the contrary, may choose to delegate continued
decision-making to his or her parent, or other willing adult. Such
choice is made in the presence of at least one representative of the
school district and one other witness and is documented in written
form and maintained in the student record.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
603 CMR 28.08(5)
300.347(c), 300.517
District Response Required: No
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 8
Evaluation Team composition
The following persons are members of the evaluation Team:
1. The child’s parents
2. A representative of the school district who acts as Chairperson and who is
(1) qualified to supervise or provide special education; (2) is knowledgeable
about the general curriculum; and (3) is knowledgeable about the availability
of resources of the district.
3. A representative of the school district who has the authority to commit the
resources of the district (and who may act as the Chairperson)
4. A teacher who has recently had or currently has the student in a classroom or
other teaching situation. If the student is involved or may be involved in a
regular education program, a regular education teacher must be included as a
Team member.
5. The student, age fourteen and older, if he/she chooses
6. Other individuals at the request of the student's parents
7. At least one teacher or specialist trained in the area of the student's suspected
special needs
8. Individuals who are qualified to interpret the instructional implications of
evaluation results
9. Other individuals who may be necessary to write an IEP for the child, as
determined by the Administrator of Special Education
10. When one purpose of the Team meeting is to discuss transition services, the
student age sixteen or older (or younger, if appropriate) is a part of Team
process. If the student does not attend the Team meeting, the school district
ensures that the Team is informed of the student's interests and preferences.
11. When one purpose of the Team meeting is to discuss transition services, a
representative of any public agency who may be responsible for providing
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 25 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
or paying for transition services is invited to the Team meeting. If the
representative(s) does not attend the meeting, the school district takes other
steps to obtain the participation of these agencies.
12. When one purpose of the Team meeting is to discuss vocational education
needs, a person knowledgeable about vocational education placement
options is present at the meeting.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
28.02(22)
34 CFR 300.344; 300.552
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
The IEP Teams at the preschool, elementary and middle school levels are fully represented. However,
at the high school level, although guidance staff are often present, there is not always a regular
education teacher in attendance to represent knowledge of classroom performance and need.
Interviews indicated that not all staff are aware of the plan and procedures in place to ensure that
coverage is provided when regular education personnel are required to attend Team meetings.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 9
Eligibility determination: Timelines for evaluation, provision of IEP and/or
identification of other needed instructional programs
1. Within forty-five school working days after receipt of the parent's written
consent to an initial evaluation, unscheduled evaluation, or re-evaluation, the
school district:
a.
provides an evaluation
b.
convenes a Team meeting
c.
determines whether the student has one or more disabilities
d.
determines if the student is making effective progress in school
e.
determines if any lack of progress is a result of the student’s
disability
f.
determines if the student requires special education and/or related
services and/or accommodations in order to make effective progress
or that the student requires related services in order to access the
general curriculum
g.
develops an IEP where the student is found to need special
education
h.
provides the parent with the proposed IEP, or a written explanation
of the finding of no eligibility
i.
determines that a student is ineligible to receive special education
and/or the student’s lack of progress is due to a lack of instruction in
reading or math or limited English proficiency or social
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 26 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
maladjustment, the student is referred to a more appropriate
instructional program or support service
j.
determines at the time of re-evaluation if the student would continue
to make progress in school without the provision of special
education services.
2. If a Team determines that a student is not eligible for special education but may
be eligible for accommodation(s) for disability(ies) under Section 504, the
student is referred for consideration by the district for eligibility under that
regular education program.
3. When the development of a student’s IEP does not indicate a need for direct
services, the Team makes a finding of no eligibility and appropriate services are
provided through the district’s general education program.
State Regulations
28.05(1) and (2)
Federal Requirements
300.534
District Response Required:
Rating: Partially Implemented
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Student record review shows that in some cases, the provision of the proposed IEP and placement to
the parent exceeds the mandated 45-day timeframe.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 10
End of school year evaluations
If consent is received within thirty (30) to forty-five (45) school working days before
the end of the school year, the school district ensures that a Team meeting is
scheduled so as to allow for the provision of a proposed IEP or written notice of the
finding that the student is not eligible no later than fourteen (14) days after the end of
the school year..
State Regulations
28.05(1)
Federal Requirements
300.342
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 27 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 11
School district response to parental request for independent educational
evaluation
If a parent disagrees with an initial evaluation or re-evaluation completed by the
school district, and the parent requests an independent educational evaluation, the
district implements the following requirements:
1.
All who abide by the rates set by the state agency responsible for setting such
independent educational evaluations funded by the district are conducted by
qualified persons who are registered, certified, licensed or otherwise
approved and rates. Unique circumstances of the child are justified when an
individual assessment rate is higher than that normally allowed.
2.
The school district has procedures to offer parents the option of participating
in an income eligibility program for free or reduced cost independent
educational evaluations that are equivalent to the types of assessments done
by the school district.
3.
The district extends the right to a publicly funded independent educational
evaluation (only if cost shared or funded for state wards or for students
receiving free or reduced cost lunch) for sixteen (16) months from the date of
the evaluation with which the parent disagrees.
4.
If the parent is requesting an evaluation in an area not assessed by the school
district, or if the student does not meet or the parent does not choose to share
the financial documentation regarding the income eligibility standards for
free or reduced cost independent educational evaluation, then the school
district responds in accordance with the requirements of federal law by
paying for the independent educational evaluation or, within five school
days, proceeding to Special Education Appeals to show that its evaluation
was comprehensive and appropriate. Where the Department’s Special
Education Appeals finds that the school district’s evaluation was
comprehensive and appropriate, the school district does not pay for the
independent educational evaluation requested by the parent.
5.
Whenever possible, the independent educational evaluation is completed and a
written report sent no later than thirty (30) days after the date the parent
requests the independent educational evaluation. If publicly funded, the report
is sent to the parents and to the school district. The independent evaluator’s
report summarizes, in writing, procedures, assessments, results, and diagnostic
impressions as well as educationally relevant recommendations for meeting
identified needs of the student. The independent evaluator recommends
appropriate types of placements but does not recommend specific classrooms
or schools.
6.
Within ten (10) school days from the time the school district receives the
report of the independent educational evaluation, the Team reconvenes and
considers the independent educational evaluation (which may be publicly or
privately funded) and whether a new or amended IEP is appropriate.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
28.04(5)
300.502(a)(3)(i)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 28 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 12
Frequency of re-evaluation
1. Every three years, or sooner if necessary, the school district, with parental
consent, conducts a full three-year re-evaluation consistent with the requirements
of federal law.
2. The district implements re-evaluation procedures in all cases where it is
suspected that a student is no longer eligible for special education.
State Regulations
28.04(3)
Federal Requirements
300.536
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 13
Progress Reports and content
1. Parents receive reports on the student's progress toward reaching the goals
set in the IEP at least as often as parents are informed of the progress of nondisabled students.
2. Progress report information sent to parents includes written information on
the student’s progress toward the annual goals in the IEP, including
information on the extent to which such progress is sufficient to enable the
child to achieve the goals by the end of the year.
State Regulations
28.07(3)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.347
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Review of progress reports shows that reports do not always specifically address the student’s
progress toward individual IEP goals and objectives or indicate whether the student will achieve the
annual goals by the end of the IEP period.
The student record review shows that the district does not always address or document the steps taken
when a student is failing to make progress towards the annual IEP goals. Interviews indicate that
there were no procedures established system-wide regarding the steps to take when a student is failing
to make progress towards the annual IEP goals and/or exhibiting recurring issues in maintaining
classroom/school-wide behavior, achieving passing grades or demonstrating consistent school
attendance.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 29 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 14
Annual review Team meeting
At least annually, on or before the anniversary date of the implementation of the IEP,
a Team meeting (including the major service providers and the parent) is held to
consider the student’s progress and to review, revise, or develop a new IEP or refer
the student for a re-evaluation, as appropriate.
State Regulations
28.04(3)
Federal Requirements
300.343(c)
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
I. ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 1
Appropriate individual academic and career/vocational assessments are
administered to all incoming students who will be enrolled in career and technical
education programs. Perkins Sections 2, 135; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03(4)(d)(e)
Examples of Assessments:
Career/Vocational Assessments: ACT Career Planning, ACDM, Bennett Mech.,
CAB, Career Inventories for Learning Disabled, CIT, DISCOVER, Myers Briggs,
SAGE, Self-Directed Search (SDS), Other________
Academic Assessments: ABLE, APTICOM, CAT, IOWA, METROPOLITAN,
MCAS, Stanford 9, WRAT, Other________
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Appropriate individual academic and career/vocational assessments are provided to all
incoming students who will be enrolled in career and technical education programs. Perkins
Sections 2; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03(4)(d)(e).
Chapter 74 Criteria:
Based upon record reviews and interviews with staff, parents/guardians and students, while
career/vocational assessments are administered (i.e., Career Cruiser, exploratory assessment, and
CDM), no academic assessments are provided to incoming students after admission.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 30 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 2
Academic and career/vocational assessments administered to incoming students are
used in planning students’ entire academic and technical program of study. Perkins
Section 135; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03(4)(d)(e)
District Response Required:
Rating: Partially Implemented
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Academic and career/vocational assessments provided to incoming students are used in planning
students’ entire academic and technical program of study. Perkins sections 135; Chapter 74 603
4.03(4)(d)(e).
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
Based upon record reviews and interviews with staff, parents/guardians and students, academic and
career/vocational assessments are not used in planning a student’s program of study. With the
exception of exploratory assessments used for initial program placement, there is no evidence of
planning based upon assessment results. A review of students’ career plan/portfolios suggests that
they are not completed by students or reviewed by parents/guardians. Interviews with highly involved
parents/guardians indicate that they neither see nor have been asked to review their son/daughter’s
career plan/portfolios.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 3
Methods of measuring academic and technical competency gain and competency
attainment are appropriate. Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03
(4)(a)(c)(d)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Methods of measuring academic and technical competency attainment are appropriate.
Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74 603 4.03(4)(a)(c)(d)
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
Based upon record reviews and interviews with staff, parents/guardians and students, not all
career/vocational technical programs have and utilize technical competency checklists. Student
portfolios are not rigorous or consistently used as an assessment strategy in all academic and
technical courses/programs.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 31 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
I. ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT PROGRESS
Legal Standard
ELE 1
Annual Assessment
1. The district annually assesses the English proficiency of all limited English
proficient (LEP) students.
2. The following tests selected by the Massachusetts Board of Education are
administered annually by qualified staff to students who are English
learners:
(a) the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) in
grades 3-12; and
(b) the Massachusetts English Proficiency Assessment (MEPA) in
grades 3-12, and the Massachusetts English Language Assessment
– Oral (MELA-O) in grades K-12.
Authority: G.L. c. 71A, § 7; 603 CMR 14.02
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 2
MCAS Participation
Limited English proficient students participate in the annual administration of the
MCAS (Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System) exam as required
and in accordance with Department guidelines.
Authority: GL. C. 71A, § 7; G.L. c. 69, § 1I; N.C.L.B., Title I, Title VI
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 32 of 152
COMPONENT II: STUDENT IDENTIFICATION AND PLACEMENT
The criteria in this component examine whether the district has followed procedures for
student identification and placement into the program according to the criteria in regulations
for the program areas listed below:


Special Education (Report Issues # SE 15-23)
Civil Rights Methods of Administration (Report Issues # MOA 1-6)


Title I (Report Issues # TI 19-20)
Career and Technical Education (Report Issues # CTE 4-5)

English Learner Education (Report Issues # ELE 3-6)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 33 of 152
SPECIAL EDUCATION
II. STUDENT IDENTIFICATION AND PLACEMENT
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 15
Outreach by the School District (Child Find)
The district has annual or more frequent outreach and continuous liaison with those
groups below from which promotion or transfer of students in need of special
education may be expected, or which would include students in need of special
education:
1.
professionals in community
2.
private nursery schools
3.
day care facilities
4.
group homes
5.
parent organizations
6.
clinical /health care agencies
7.
early intervention programs
8.
other public/private/parochial schools
9.
other agencies/organizations
10.
the school itself, including charter schools
11.
agencies serving migrant and/or homeless persons pursuant to the
McKinney-Vento Education Act for Homeless Children
State Regulations
Rating: Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.125; 300.312
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 16
Screening
1.
The school district conducts screening for three and four year olds and for all
children who are of age to enter kindergarten. Such screening is designed to
review a child’s development and to assist in identification of those children who
should be referred for an evaluation to determine eligibility for special education
services.
2.
3.
Participation in the screening program for three and four year olds is
optional on the part of the parents.
Provision is made for ongoing and periodic screening of all students as
required by the Department of Public Health (vision, hearing, and posture).
State Regulations
28.03(1)(d)
Chapter 71, Section 57
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Federal Requirements
District Response Required:
No
Page 34 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 17
Initiation of services at age three and Early Intervention transition procedures
1.
The school district encourages referrals from the Department of Public
Health, other agencies, and individuals for young children when or before
the child turns two-and-one-half years old in order to ensure continuity of
services and to ensure the development and implementation of an IEP for
eligible children by the date of the child's third birthday in accordance with
federal requirements.
2.
The district implements procedures to ensure the effective transition of
young children with disabilities from Early Intervention Programs through
participation in transition planning conferences arranged by such programs.
State Regulations
28.06(7)(b)
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.24(b)(3); 300.121(c);
300.132; 300.342(c)
District Response Required: No
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 18A
IEP development and content
1.
Upon determining that the student is eligible for special education, the Team,
including the parent(s), develops an IEP at the Team meeting using the
evaluation data to guide development of measurable, annual goals and
objectives/benchmarks for the student. If the district chooses to draft any
element(s) of the IEP for discussion, the Team Chairperson ensures that those
elements are genuinely considered prior to adoption at the Team meeting.
All ideas and needs of the child as expressed by all Team members,
especially the parents, are genuinely considered by the district prior to
proposing the IEP.
2.
The IEP includes specially designed instruction to meet the needs of the
individual student and related services that are necessary to allow the student
to benefit from the specially designed instruction, or consists solely of related
services that are necessary to allow the student to access the general
curriculum, consistent with federal and state requirements.
3.
In developing the IEP, the Team proposes specially designed instruction and
related services according to the needs of the child and not according to the
availability of such instruction or related services.
4.
The IEP is completed addressing all elements of the most current IEP format
provided by the Department of Education. Where applicable, the district
includes in the IEP, or other notice to the parent, information regarding the
implementation of any necessary restraint procedures for students as required
under 603 CMR 46.00.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 35 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
5.
6.
7.
If the Team members are unable to agree on the IEP, the Team chairperson
states the elements of the IEP proposed by the school district.
The school district ensures that each IEP Team has at least one person with
authority to commit the resources of the district and that whatever services
are set out in the IEP will actually be provided and that the IEP will not be
changed at a higher administrative level within the district.
The IEP is written in generally understandable language.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
28.05(3), (4), (6) and (7)
34 CFR 300.340-300.350; 300.343(a)
28.06(2)
34 CFR Part 300, Appendix A, Question #22.
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
The student record review shows that IEP goals and objectives at the preschool, elementary, middle
school s and alternative schools are typically well-written, measurable and address the individual
student’s area of educational need.
However, at the high school level, including the vocational school, the goals and objectives are not
always written in measurable terms, specific to the student’s disability(ies) and need for specialized
instruction and/or therapeutic intervention. IEP Teams do not always fully describe the reasons why
the student is being removed from the general education program. IEPs for students placed in the
vocational school do not always contain goals for the vocational component of the student’s program,
when necessary and appropriate. (Refer to finding under CTE 5.)
IEPs for students, who have social-emotional and behavioral needs, do not always include
individualized goals and/or a behavioral intervention plan to address the student’s documented needs.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 18B
Determination of placement; provision of IEP to parent
1. At the Team meeting, after the IEP has been fully developed, the Team
determines the appropriate placement to deliver the services on the student’s
IEP.
2. Unless the student’s IEP requires some other arrangement, the student is
educated in the school that he or she would attend if the student did not require
special education.
3. The decision regarding placement is based on the IEP, including the types of
related services that are to be provided to the child, the type of settings in which
those services are to be provided, the types of service providers, and the location
at which the services are to be provided.
4. The placement selected by the Team is the least restrictive environment
consistent with the needs of the student.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 36 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
5. Immediately following the development of the IEP, and within 45 school
working days after receipt of the parent’s written consent to an initial evaluation
or reevaluation, the district provides the parent with two (2) copies of the
proposed IEP and proposed placement along with the required notice, except that
the proposal of placement may be delayed according to the provisions of 603
CMR 28.06(2)(e) in a limited number of cases.
State Regulations
28.05(6) and (7)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.346
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews and student records indicate that the vocational school does not always base the student’s
services or program placement on the basis of the least restrictive environment, rather on the
availability of personnel. In some cases, students’ placements were changed from a content area
inclusion classroom to a resource room setting without a documented Team determination that the
student’s lack of progress in the inclusion classroom required movement to a more restrictive setting
rather than examine the student’s needs for supplementary aids , services and modifications.. In
addition, interviews and student records indicate that some students in the vocational school have
received instruction in general education mainstream English and Math classes with support, but not
in other mainstream content area classes. The vocational school tends to place students on IEPs into
resource rooms, which results in limited usage of the inclusion model as an option for placement.
(Refer to finding under CTE 5.)
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 19
Extended evaluation
If the Team finds a student eligible for special education and finds the evaluation
information insufficient to develop a full or partial IEP, the Team, with the parents’
consent, agrees to an extended evaluation period.
1. The extended evaluation period is not used to deny programs or services
determined to be necessary by the Team. If, prior to the extended evaluation,
the Team determines that sufficient information is available to determine, in part,
necessary annual goals and services, the Team writes a partial IEP that, if
accepted by the parent, is immediately implemented by the district while the
extended evaluation is occurring.
2. The extended evaluation period is not used to allow additional time to complete
the required assessments.
3. If the parent consents to an extended evaluation, the Team documents their
findings and determines what evaluation time period is necessary and the types
of information needed to develop an IEP. The Team may decide to meet at
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 37 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
intervals during the extended evaluation, but in all cases reconvenes promptly to
develop an IEP when the evaluation is complete.
4. The extended evaluation may extend longer than one week, but does not exceed
eight school weeks.
5. The extended evaluation is not considered a placement.
State Regulations
28.05(2)(b)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Student record review and interviews show that there is a lack of understanding and knowledge by
IEP Teams regarding the appropriate implementation of an extended evaluation.
In some cases, the extended evaluation is used as a diagnostic placement.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 20
Least restrictive program selected
1.
The program selected is the least restrictive environment for students, with
consideration given to any potential harmful effect on the student or on the
quality of services that he or she needs.
2.
If the student is removed from the general education classroom at any time,
the Team states why the removal is considered critical to the student’s
program and the basis for its conclusion that education of the student in a less
restrictive environment, with the use of supplementary aids and services,
could not be achieved satisfactorily.
3.
The district does not remove an eligible child from the general education
classroom solely because of needed modification in the curriculum.
4.
If a student’s IEP necessitates special education services in a day or
residential facility or an out-of-district educational collaborative program, the
IEP Team considers whether the student requires special education services
and support to promote the student’s transition to placement in a less
restrictive program.
State Regulations
28.06(2)(a); Chapter 71B, section 3
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.130; 300.550-300.556
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to the findings under SE 18B regarding placement of students in courses at the vocational
school.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 38 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 21
School day and school year requirements
1. The Team routinely considers the need for an educational program that is less
than or more than the regular school day or school year, including extended day,
or year, and/or residential services and indicates on the IEP why the shorter or
longer program is necessary.
2. The daily duration of the child’s program is equal to that of the regular school
day unless the Team states that a different duration is necessary to provide a free
appropriate public education to the child. In such case the daily duration of the
program shall be specified by the Team, and Team shall state on the IEP the
reason for such different duration.
3. Specialized transportation schedules do not impede a student’s access to a full
school day and program of instruction.
4. An extended day or year program is identified if the student has demonstrated or
is likely to demonstrate substantial regression in his or her learning skills and/or
substantial difficulty in relearning such skills if an extended program is not
provided.
5. If residential services are required, the IEP clearly specifies the reasons for such
determination and how such services will be coordinated with the day education
services provided to the student. Additionally, the annual goals and services on
the student’s IEP reflects the comprehensive nature of the educational program
required.
6. Camping or recreation programs provided solely for recreational purposes and
with no corresponding IEP goals or specially designed instruction are not to be
considered for extended year programs.
State Regulations
28.05(4)
Chapter 69, Section 1G
Rating: Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.309(b)
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 22
IEP implementation and availability
1. Where the IEP of the student in need of special education has been accepted in
whole or in part by that student's parent, the school district provides the mutually
agreed upon services without delay.
2. At the beginning of each school year, the district has an IEP in effect for each
eligible student within its jurisdiction.
3. Each teacher and provider described in the IEP is informed of his or her specific
responsibilities related to the implementation of the student’s IEP.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 39 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
4.
The school district does not delay implementation of the IEP due to lack of classroom
space or personnel, provides as many of the services on the accepted IEP as possible and
immediately informs parents in writing of any delayed services, reasons for delay,
actions that the school district is taking to address the lack of space or personnel and
offers alternative methods to meet the goals on the accepted IEP. Upon agreement of the
parents, the school district implements alternative methods immediately until the lack of
space or personnel issues are resolved.
State Regulations
28.05(7)(b); 28.06(2)(d)(2)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.342
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews and the review of student records show that, at the preschool and elementary level, there is
a lack of oversight regarding the ongoing provision of related services. In a number of cases, when
related services are interrupted due to the lack of personnel, the district does not implement the
required procedures to immediately notify parents in writing of the interruption in services, the reason
for the interruption in services and the steps the district will take to provide an alternative plan for the
continuation of services and goals as agreed to on the student’s current IEP.
At the high school level, regular education teaching staff are not always informed of their
responsibilities for students on IEPs and Section 504 plans. In addition, there is no system in place to
monitor the ongoing provision of IEP services, modifications and accommodations and Section 504
accommodations.
(Refer to findings under CTE 12 for the Cooperative Education Program at the vocational school.)
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 23
Confidentiality of personally identifiable information
The district protects the confidentiality of any personally identifiable information
that is collected, used or maintained in accordance with federal and state law.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
603 CMR 23.00 (Student Records Regulations) 34 CFR 300.560-576; Family
Educational Rights and Privacy Act
(FERPA)
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews indicate that at the high school, evaluators are not always provided with appropriate
spaces and adequate scheduling time when conducting assessments for initial and reevaluations.
In some cases, evaluators use a classroom during free periods. This practice typically does not allow
the evaluator to complete the testing and imposes further time constraints on the completion of the
agreed upon evaluations as referenced in SE 1.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 40 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION
II. STUDENT IDENTIFICATION AND PLACEMENT
Legal Standard
MOA 1
Identification of limited-English-proficient students
The district uses qualified staff and appropriate procedures and assessments to
identify students who are limited-English-proficient and assess their level of English
proficiency.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(a),(b); EEOA: 20 U.S.C. 1703(f); 603
CMR 14.02; M.G.L c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.03
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to CTE 5 regarding the identification of students who are limited-English-proficient at the
vocational school.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 2
Program modifications and support services for limited-English-proficient
students
The district implements necessary program modifications and support services to
serve effectively limited-English-proficient students who need special language
assistance. Such program modifications and support services:
1. are based on sound education theory;
2. provide for English-language development;
3. provide for the meaningful participation of limited-English-proficient students in
the district’s educational program;
4. are evaluated and appropriately revised in an ongoing manner; and
5. are demonstrably useful in assisting students receiving such program
modifications and services to gain English language proficiency.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(a),(b); EEOA: 20 U.S.C. 1703(f);
M.G.L. c. 71, s. 38Q1/2; 603 CMR 28.03(3)(a); M.G.L. c. 71A, ss. 2(e), 4; 603
CMR 14.04; M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.03
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 41 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 2A
Identification of homeless children and youth
The homeless education liaison designated under MOA 11A ensures that homeless
children and youth are identified by school personnel and through coordination
activities with other entities and agencies.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(6)(A)(i)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 2B
Equal educational opportunity for homeless children and youth
The homeless education liaison ensures that homeless children and youth enroll in,
and have a full and equal opportunity to succeed in, district schools.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(6)(A)(ii)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 2C
Access to services for homeless families, children, and youth
The homeless education liaison ensures that homeless families, children, and youth
receive educational services for which they are eligible, including Head Start and
Even Start programs and preschool programs administered by the district, and
referrals to health care services, dental services, mental health services, and other
appropriate services.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(6)(A)(iii)
Rating: Commendable
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings: Based on interviews and documentation, an exemplary level of
procedures and referrals are in place that ensure that homeless children and youth enrolled in the
schools receive all services for which they are eligible. The forms and information are available in
different languages and additional translations are done as needed. There is a strong collaboration
with the nurses, Board of Health, medical agencies and hospitals in providing health care to the
homeless families in Medford.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 42 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 3
Access to a full range of education programs
Students from linguistic, racial, and ethnic minorities; males; females; homeless
students; and students with disabilities all have access equal to that of other students
to the general education program and the full range of any occupational/vocational
education programs offered by the district.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(a),(b); EEOA: 20 U.S.C. 1703(f); Title IX:
20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.31, 106.34, 106.35; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34
CFR 104.4; Title II: 42 U.S.C. 12132; 28 CFR 35.130; IDEA: 34 CFR 300.305;
NCLB: Title III, Part A, Sec. 3121(c)(1)(C); Title X, Part C, Secs. 721, 722(g)(4);
Mass. Const. amend. art. 114; M.G.L. c. 71A, s. 7; c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.03
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to findings under CTE 4, CTE 8, CTE 9, and CTE 14 regarding limited access to technology and
computer labs, the cooperative education program, guidance and counseling, advanced placement and
honors courses and consistent, rigorous regular education curricular requirements for all students.
At the high school, the science resource room does not have access to the lab facilities as part of the
curriculum. Students placed in resource rooms at the middle school have limited technological access to
tech and computer labs.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 4
Placement of disabled, linguistic and racial minority, homeless, and female/male
students
Patterns of placement in district programs and services for disabled students,
linguistic and racial minority students, homeless students, and females are consistent
with patterns of placement for non-disabled students, linguistic and racial majority
students, nonhomeless students, and males. If these patterns of placement are not
consistent, the district is able to demonstrate that placements have been made for
valid educational reasons.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(a),(b); EEOA: 20 U.S.C. 1703(f); Title IX:
20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.31, 106.34, 106.35, 106.36; Section 504: 29 U.S.C.
794; 34 CFR 104.4; Title II: 42 U.S.C. 12132; 28 CFR 35.130; NCLB: Title III, Part
A, Sec. 3121(c)(1)(C); Title X, Part C, Secs. 721, 722(g)(4); Mass. Const. amend.
art. 114; M.G.L. c. 71A, s. 7; c. 71B, s. 6; c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.03
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 43 of 152
Department of Education Findings:
Based upon the review of the DOE data submitted by the district for the 2003-04 school year, there
were some categories of placement patterns for students with disabilities and limited English
proficient students that are possible indicators of underrepresentation or overrepresentation. The data
indicates the following possible trends: overrepresentation of African-American students in
substantially separate classrooms; overrepresentation of African American and limited English
proficient students in Title 1 programs; under-representation in advanced placement, Chapter74 and
Non-chapter 74 programs; under-representation of students on IEPs at the middle school placed in
full inclusion settings. The district has reviewed the above possible trends of disproportionality and
has initiated a study group during the summer of 2005 for continued investigation and examination of
the issues.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 5A
Placement of homeless students
According to the best interest of the homeless student, the district either
1. continues the student’s education in the student’s school of origin for the
duration of homelessness and, if the student becomes permanently housed during
an academic year, for the remainder of that academic year; or
2. enrolls the student in any public school that nonhomeless students who live in
the attendance area where the student is actually living (with or without parents)
are eligible to attend.
If the district sends the student to a school other than the school of origin or a school
requested by the student’s parent or guardian, it provides the parent or guardian with
a written explanation, including a statement of the right to appeal the placement. If
the student is an unaccompanied youth, notice of the right to appeal is provided to
the student.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(3)(A), (B)
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 5B
Immediate enrollment of homeless students
1. The school where a homeless student is placed immediately enrolls the
student even if he or she is unable to produce records normally required for
enrollment, such as previous academic records, medical records, or proof of
residency.
2. The enrolling school immediately contacts the school last attended by the
homeless student to obtain relevant academic and other records.
3. If the homeless student needs to obtain immunizations or immunization or
medical records, the enrolling school immediately refers the student’s parent
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 44 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
or guardian (or the student, if an unaccompanied youth) to the homeless
education liaison for assistance in obtaining them.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(3)(C)
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 5C
Transportation of homeless students to and from the school of origin
1. The school district has adopted policies and practices to ensure that
transportation is provided, at the request of the parent or guardian (or in the
case of an unaccompanied youth, the homeless education liaison), to and
from the school of origin, in accordance with the following provisions.
2. If the homeless student is continuing to attend his or her school of origin and
continues to live in the school district in which the school of origin is
located, the student’s transportation to and from the school of origin is
provided or arranged by the school district in which the school of origin is
located.
3. If a homeless student is continuing to attend his or her school of origin but
lives in another district than that in which the school of origin is located, the
two districts agree on a method to apportion responsibility and costs for
transportation to and from the school of origin. If they cannot agree on a
method, the responsibility and costs are shared equally.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(1)(J)(iii)
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 5D
Disputes over the enrollment of homeless students
If a dispute arises over a homeless student’s placement or enrollment in a school:
1. the school in which enrollment is sought immediately admits the homeless
student, pending resolution of the dispute;
2. the school provides the parent or guardian of the student with a written
explanation of the school’s decision regarding school selection or
enrollment, including the rights of the parent, guardian, or unaccompanied
youth to appeal the decision;
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 45 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
3. the student, parent, or guardian is referred to the homeless education liaison,
who carries out the dispute resolution process prescribed by the Department
of Education and, in the case of an unaccompanied youth, ensures that the
youth is immediately enrolled in school pending resolution of the dispute.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(3)(E)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 6
Availability of in-school programs for pregnant students
1. Pregnant students are permitted to remain in regular classes and participate
in extracurricular activities with non-pregnant students throughout their
pregnancy, and after giving birth are permitted to return to the same
academic and extracurricular program as before the leave.
2. The district does not require a pregnant student to obtain the certification of
a physician that the student is physically and emotionally able to continue in
school unless it requires such certification for all students for other physical
or emotional conditions requiring the attention of a physician.
Title IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.40(b)
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
No
TITLE 1
II. STUDENT IDENTIFICATION AND PLACEMENT
Legal Standard
TI 19
(For Targeted Assistance Schools) A description is available of the multiple,
objective, educationally-related criteria used to identify and rank eligible students in
grade 3 and higher who are failing or most at-risk of failing to meet the high student
academic performance and assessment standards required of all students.
1115 (b)(1)(B) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 46 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 20
(For Targeted Assistance Schools) There is evidence that limited English proficient
students, students with disabilities, and students who are homeless are identified as
eligible and selected for Title I services on the same basis as other students selected
to receive services.
1115(b)(2)(A) NCLB
District Response Required: No
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
II. STUDENT IDENTIFICATION AND PLACEMENT
Legal Standard
CTE 4
Students enrolled in career and technical education programs are appropriately
identified for services. Perkins Sections 3, 135, 315; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03
(4);(6);(7); Title IX.
*Perkins definition of “career and technical education.” Career and technical
education means organized educational activities that offer a sequence of courses
that provides individuals with the academic and technical skills the individuals need
to prepare for further education and for careers in current or emerging employment
sectors.
**Chapter 74 definition of “vocational technical education program.” A program
approved by the Department that provides instruction in academic and technical
subject matter and employability skills necessary for high wage/high demand
occupations and further education.
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
Students enrolled in career/vocational technical education programs are appropriately
identified for services. Perkins Sections 3, 135, 315; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03(4);(6);(7); Title
IX.
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria
Based upon record reviews and interviews with staff, parents/guardians and students,
career/vocational technical students are not afforded the same support services as Medford High
School (MHS) students. For example, there is no computer lab and few classrooms are equipped
with functioning computers. Library materials for career/vocational technical students are identified
with a blue dot, used to represent books for “reluctant” and “low-level” readers. Few students at
Medford Vocational Technical High School (MVTHS) are provided with college counseling. The
general attitude communicated by staff is that MVTHS students are “motivated to work, not go to
college”.
A limited number of CVTE programs provide on-site, work-based learning opportunities and support
(e.g., Early Childhood and Construction). Few students participate in cooperative education and
there is little evidence that programs promote off-site work-based learning opportunities.
Based on interviews and documentation, counseling programs and interventions (e.g., college
counseling, career planning) are not implemented according to a school-counseling curriculum.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 47 of 152
While the MVTHS handbook contains the required Title IX non-discrimination statement, one
protected class (i.e., sexual orientation) is missing. In addition, the term “handicapped” as opposed
to “disability” is used.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 5
Special population students are appropriately identified for services. Perkins
Sections 135, 316; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4)(d)
Perkins identified special populations:
 individuals with disabilities
 individuals from economically disadvantaged families, including foster children
 individuals preparing for nontraditional by gender training and employment
 single parents, including single pregnant women
 displaced homemakers
 individuals with limited English proficiency (English language learners)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Special population students are appropriately identified for services. Perkins Sections 135, 316;
Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03(4)(d).
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
Based on record reviews and interviews, students with disabilities are identified for services; however,
there is no evidence that the IEP team considers how the disability affects the students’ technical skill
development, and the need for support services in technical shops, if necessary.
Medford Vocational Technical High School (MVTHS) has 13 students identified as First Language
Not English, as reported in SIMS data; however, there is no documentation of the assessment of their
English proficiency or home language surveys. There is also no evidence that students with limited
English proficiency, economically disadvantaged students or nontraditional by gender students are
appropriately identified and receive support services at MVTHS.
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
II. STUDENT IDENTIFICATION AND PLACEMENT
Legal Standard
ELE 3
Initial Identification
The district has procedures that actively seek to identify limited English proficient
students.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 48 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
II. STUDENT IDENTIFICATION AND PLACEMENT
Legal Standard
Authority: G.L. c. 71A § 4, 5
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 4
Waiver Procedures
1. Waivers may be granted based on parent request, providing the parent
annually visits the school and provides written informed consent. Parents
must be provided with program descriptions in a language they can
understand.
2. Students who are under age 10, may only be granted waivers if (a) the
student has been placed in an English language classroom for at least 30
calendar days, (b) the school certifies in no less than 250 words that the
student “has special and individual physical or psychological needs, separate
from lack of English proficiency” that requires an alternative program, and
(c) the waiver is authorized by both the school superintendent and principal.
All waiver requests and school district responses (approved or disapproved
waivers) must be placed in the student’s permanent school record. For
students under age 10, both the superintendent and the principal must
authorize the waiver, and it must be made under guidelines established by,
and subject to the review of the local school committee. These guidelines
may, but are not required to, contain an appeals process. Students who are
over age 10 may be granted waivers when it is the informed belief of the
school principal and educational staff that an alternative program would be
better for the student’s overall educational progress. Students receiving
waivers may be transferred to other English language education programs.
See 603 CMR 14.04.
Authority: G.L. c. 71A, § 5
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Documentation shows that the district has knowledge of the required waiver procedures and have
translated the waiver forms into Portuguese and Haitian-Creole.
However, there is a lack of consistent understanding of the required procedures in order to implement
the waiver option system-wide. The district tends to implement the procedures regarding a parent’s
right to opt out, rather than the above waiver procedures
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 49 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 5
Program Placement and Structure
The district places LEP students in
1. “sheltered English immersion” classrooms, in which nearly all books
and instructional materials are in English, but with the curriculum and
presentation designed for students who are learning the language. All
reading, writing and subject matter are taught in English. Teachers
may use an English learner’s native language, when necessary, for
clarification purposes. Districts may also modify general education
classrooms, so that the activities and instruction in those classrooms
provide sheltered English instruction to LEP students; or
2. “two-way bilingual” classrooms, in which students develop language
proficiency in two languages by receiving instruction in English and
another language in a classroom that is usually comprised of an equal
number of proficient English speakers and proficient speakers of the
other language; or
3. (for kindergarten students) either a sheltered English immersion, twoway bilingual, or an English-only language general education
classroom with assistance in English language acquisition, including,
but not limited to, English as a second language.
Authority G.L. c. 71A, § 2, 4, 7; Title VI
District Response Required:
Rating: Partially Implemented
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
The district has English language support programs in place for students from grades 1-12.
However, interviews indicate that the district has not developed a program to provide English
language support to kindergarten students who are limited English proficient, consistent with the
requirements of Chapter 71A and Title VI.
At the high school and at the vocational school, LEP students are not always provided with sheltered
English instruction in elective and nonacademic classes and in the vocational program.
(Refer to CTE 14.)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 50 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 6
Program Exit and Readiness
1. The district does not re-designate a student from Limited English Proficient
(LEP) to Formerly Limited English Proficient (FLEP), until:
a) s/he is deemed English proficient; and
b) can participate meaningfully in all aspects of the district’s general
education program without the use of adapted or simplified English
materials.
2. The time in which LEP students receive sheltered English immersion
instruction is not normally intended to exceed one school year.
3. Districts may not limit or cap the amount of time in which an LEP student is
placed in a language support program and may only exit the student from
such a program after determining that the student is proficient in English.
Authority: Title VI; G.L. c. 71A, § 4
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Documentation shows that there are stated measurable thresholds for determining a student’s’
ability to exit an English language support program, and procedures to monitor students redesignated as Formerly Limited English Proficient (FLEP). However, interviews and student records
indicate that no formalized procedures are in place to re-designate LEP students to a FLEP status to
ensure consistent implementation of the requirements system-wide. In addition, interviews and student
records indicate that there are no formal exit criteria in place to assess and move limited English
proficient students at appropriate junctures, who are placed in SEI classrooms and have attained the
necessary English language proficiency level and skill ability level.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 51 of 152
COMPONENT III: PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
The criteria in this component examine whether the district has ensured that parents are notified,
in the appropriate language, and are involved in decisions regarding their children’s programs
and services for the program areas listed below:


Special Education (Report Issues # SE 24-32)
Civil Rights Methods of Administration (Report Issue # MOA 6A-7)



Title I (Report Issues # TI 21-23)
Safe and Drug Free Schools (Report Issues # SDF 1-3)
Career and Technical Education (Report Issues # CTE 6-7)

English Learner Education (Report Issue # ELE 7)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 52 of 152
SPECIAL EDUCATION
III. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 24
Notice to parent regarding proposal or refusal to initiate or change the
identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child or the provision
of FAPE
1. A student may be referred for an evaluation by a parent or any person in a caregiving or professional position concerned with the student's development.
2. When a student is referred for an evaluation to determine eligibility for special
education, the school district sends written notice to the child's parent(s) within 5
school days of receipt of the referral.
3. Notice is given by the district within a reasonable time for all other actions.
4. The school district provides the student's parent(s) with an opportunity to
consult with the Special Education Administrator or his/her designee to discuss
the reasons for the referral and the nature of the proposed evaluation
5. The district provides parents with an opportunity to consult with the
Administrator of Special Education or his/her designee regarding the evaluators
to be used and the proposed content of all required and optional assessments
6. The school district does not limit a parent’s right to refer a student for timely
special education evaluation because the district has not fully explored and/or
attempted some or all of the available instructional support programs or other
interventions available in general education that may be described in the
district’s Curriculum Accommodation Plan, including any pre-referral program.
7. The school district refuses to conduct an initial evaluation only when the
circumstances of a student make clear that there is no suspicion of a disability
and that there is no concern about the student’s development.
State Regulations
28.04(1)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.503(a)
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Student record review indicates that there is a wide variance in the completion of the required content
in the written notices (N1/N2). The out-of-district written notices were very detailed and responded to
each of the questions, whereas in-district notices do not always sufficiently address the required
questions or fully present the district’s proposal or refusal to act.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 53 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 25
Parental consent
In accordance with state and federal law, the school district obtains informed
parental consent as follows:
1. The school district obtains written parental consent before conducting an
initial evaluation and before making an initial placement of a student in a
special education program. Written parental consent is obtained before
conducting a reevaluation and before placing a student in a special education
placement subsequent to the initial placement in special education.
2. The school district obtains consent before initiating extended evaluation
services.
3. The school district obtains consent to the services proposed on a student’s
IEP before providing such services..
4. A parent is informed that consent may be revoked at any time. Except for initial
evaluation and initial placement, consent may not be required as condition of any
benefit to the child.
5. When the participation or consent of the parent is required and the parent
fails or refuses to participate, the attempts to secure the consent of the parent
are implemented through multiple attempts using a variety of methods which
are documented by the district. Such efforts may include letters, written
notices sent by certified mail, electronic mail (e-mail), telephone calls, or, if
appropriate, TTY communications to the home, and home visits at such time
as the parent is likely to be home. Efforts may include seeking assistance
from a community service agency to secure parental participation.
6. If, subsequent to initial evaluation and initial placement and after following
the procedures required by the regulations, the school district is unable to
obtain parental consent to a reevaluation or to placement in a special
education program subsequent to the initial placement, or the parent revokes
consent to such reevaluation or placement, the school district considers with
the parent whether such action will result in the denial of a free appropriate
public education to the child. If, after consideration, the school district
determines that the parent’s failure or refusal to consent will result in a
denial of a free appropriate public education to the student, it seeks
resolution of the dispute through Special Education Appeals
State Regulations
28.07(1)
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.500(b)(1)
District Response Required:
No
Page 54 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 26
Parent participation in meetings
1.
The district ensures that one or both parents of a child are members of any
group that makes decisions on the educational placement of their child.
2.
The Administrator of Special Education notifies parent(s) in writing of any
Team meeting early enough to ensure that they have an opportunity to
attend.
3.
The district schedules the meeting at a mutually agreed upon time and place;
and documents such efforts.
4.
If neither parent can attend, the district uses other methods to ensure parent
participation, including individual or conference telephone calls, or video
conferencing.
5.
In cases where the district, after reasonable efforts, is unable to obtain the
parents’ participation in Team meeting discussions and decisions, the district
conducts the Team meeting and documents its attempts to facilitate the
parents’ participation.
State Regulations
28.02(22)
Rating: Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.345(d), 300.501
District Response Required: No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 27
Content of Team meeting notice to parents
1.
The parent notice of an evaluation required by 603 CMR 28.04(1)(a) meets all
of the content requirements set forth in M.G.L. c.71B, §3, and in federal law
and seeks the consent of the parent for any evaluation to occur, and provides
the parent with the opportunity to express any concerns or provide information
on the student’s skills or abilities and to consult regarding the evaluators to be
used.
2.
The parent notice of any Team meeting states the purpose, time and location of
the meeting as well as who will be in attendance.
State Regulations
28.04(1)(b)
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.503-504
District Response Required:
No
Page 55 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 28
Parent provided the IEP or notice of no eligibility together with notification of
procedural safeguards and parents' rights
Immediately following the development of the IEP and without undue delay, the
district provides the parents with two copies of the proposed IEP or a written
explanation of the finding of no eligibility for special education together with the
required notice of procedural safeguards and parents’ rights.
State Regulations
28.05(7)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.345(f)
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews indicate that when a parent is not provided with a proposed IEP at the conclusion of the
Team meeting, the type of documentation provided to the parent is not consistent among Team
chairpersons and is, sometimes, only the service delivery grid. Interviews indicate that parents were
not always receiving the agreed upon goals, service delivery grid and a written summation of the main
points of the meeting, if the proposed IEP is not provided to them at the conclusion of the Team
meeting.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 29
Communications are in English and primary language of home
1.
Communications with parents are in simple and commonly understood
words and are in both English and the primary language of the home if such
primary language is other than English. Any interpreter used in fulfilling
these requirements is fluent in the primary language of the home and
familiar with special education procedures, programs and services. If the
parents or the student are unable to read in any language or are blind or
deaf, communications required by these regulations are made orally in
English with the use of a foreign language interpreter, in Braille, in sign
language, via TTY, or in writing, whichever is appropriate, and that all such
communications are documented.
2.
If the district provides notices orally or in some other mode of
communication that is not written language, the district keeps written
documentation (1) that it has provided such notice in an alternate manner,
(2) that the content of the notice and (3) the steps taken to ensure that the
parent understands the content of the notice.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 56 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
State Regulations
28.07(8)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.345(e)
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Based upon student record reviews and interviews, the district demonstrates inconsistency regarding
the translation of the mandated IEP documents throughout the evaluation and IEP process into the
primary language of the parent/guardian. There is no documentation as to whether a parent/guardian
needs language assistance or the type of assistance that is necessary to ensure access to the full IEP
process.
Interviews indicate that the district does not have a formal mechanism in place to document and
update the primary language of the home and make a determination each school year as to the type of
language assistance that parents, whose language is other than English, require for the purposes of
written and oral communications. Staff do not always have current information as to the parents’
needs for language assistance, interpreters and translated documents when students move from level
to level, such as elementary to middle and middle to high school.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 30
Elements of notice of parents’ rights
The district’s notice of parental rights contains all required elements included in the
most current version of the Massachusetts Parent’s Rights Brochure.
State Regulations
M.G.L. c. 71B, Section 3
Rating: Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.503-504
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 31
State and district responsibility for educational surrogate parents
1. When a student is without parental representation and requires an educational
surrogate parent to be appointed in accordance with federal law and regulations,
upon request of the Department, the district responsible for services to the
student assists in identifying a person willing to serve as an educational
surrogate parent.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 57 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
2. Upon assignment by the Department, such educational surrogate parent has all
the rights and responsibilities of a parent in making decisions regarding
eligibility and services for special education for the assigned student. The
Department provides notice of appointment to the school district and any state
agency with custody of the student.
3. A person identified by the district and willing to serve as an educational
surrogate parent has no conflict of interest and is not in the employ of the school
district or any state or local agencies involved with the care of the student .
4. A person identified by the district, appointed by the Department, and serving as
an educational surrogate parent does not receive financial remuneration from the
district except that the school district reimburses the person for reasonable
expenses related to the exercise of his or her responsibilities as an educational
surrogate parent for a student enrolled in the district.
State Regulations
28.07(7)
Rating: Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.515
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 32
Parent advisory council for special education
1. The school district has established a district-wide parent advisory council on
special education.
2. Membership on the council is offered to all parents of children with disabilities
and other interested parties.
3. The parent advisory council duties include but are not limited to: advising the
district on matters that pertain to the education and safety of students with
disabilities; meeting regularly with school officials to participate in the planning,
development, and evaluation of the school district’s special education programs.
4. The parent advisory council has established by-laws regarding officers and
operational procedures.
5. The parent advisory council receives assistance from the school committee
without charge, upon reasonable notice, and subject to the availability of staff
and resources.
6. The school district conducts, in cooperation with the parent advisory council, at
least one workshop annually within the district on the rights of students and their
parents and guardians under the state and federal special education laws and
makes written materials explaining such rights available upon request.
State Regulations
Chapter 71B, Section 3;
28.07(4)
Federal Requirements
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 58 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
District Response Required:
Rating: Partially Implemented
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Documentation and interviews indicate that the district and PAC are seeking to reorganize in order to
demonstrate compliance with the standards of state regulation. The current PAC leadership and the
district have not effectively worked together to ensure that workshops are conducted annually and that
the PAC maintains an advisory position that is representative of all of the parents of special education
children and students system-wide, rather than a small group of individual parents that are
advocating for the needs of a select group of students and families.
CRITERION
NUMBER
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION
III. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
Legal Standard
MOA 6A
Information and opportunities for participation for parents and guardians of
homeless students
The homeless education liaison ensures that parents and guardians of homeless
students are informed of the educational and related opportunities available to their
children and are provided with meaningful opportunities to participate in their
children’s education.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(6)(A)(iv)
District Response Required: No
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 6B
Public notice of educational rights of homeless children and youth
The homeless education liaison ensures that public notice of the educational rights of
homeless children and youth is disseminated in places where they receive services,
such as schools, family shelters, and soup kitchens.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(6)(A)(v)
Rating: Commendable
District Response Required: No
Department of Education Findings:
Based on interviews, documentation and site visits, Medford has done an exemplary job disseminating
the public notice of educational rights of homeless children and youth. This information is available
in seven languages and is posted in all schools, Indigo House, City Hall, Libraries, St. Raphael and
St. Francis Food Pantries, Tri-City, religious institutions, parent information center, Family Life
Shelter, health and community agencies and the city web site.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 59 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 6C
Information and assistance with respect to transportation of homeless students
The homeless education liaison ensures that each homeless student’s parent or
guardian, as well as any unaccompanied youth, is fully informed of all transportation
services, including transportation to and from the school of origin as required in
MOA 5C above, and is assisted in accessing transportation to the school where the
student is placed.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(6)(A)(vii)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required: No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 6D
Coordination and collaboration by the homeless education liaison
The homeless education liaison coordinates and collaborates with state coordinators
and community and school personnel responsible for the provision of education and
related services to homeless children and youth.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(6)(C)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required: No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 7
Information to be translated into languages other than English
When students have parents or guardians with limited English language skills,
general announcements and notices of extracurricular activities and other
opportunities are distributed to them in the primary language of the home. When
persons with limited English language skills reside in the community, school and
program recruitment and promotional materials are disseminated to them in their
primary language(s).
Title VI; EEOA: 20 U.S.C. 1703(f); M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.02(2)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to finding under SE 29.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 60 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
TITLE 1
III. PARENTAL AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
Legal Standard
TI 21
School District Requirements:
1.
Title I policies, programs, activities, and procedures are assessed for needs,
planned, implemented and evaluated with meaningful consultation of parents
of participating children.
1118(a)(1)
2.
The district’s written parental involvement policy is developed and annually
reevaluated with, agreed upon, and distributed to parents of participating
children.
1118(a)(2)
3.
The district provides coordination, technical assistance, and other resources
to assist schools in planning and implementing effective parental
involvement activities to improve student achievement and school
performance.
1118(e)(2) NCLB
4.
The district builds schools’ and parents’ capacity for strong parental
involvement.
5.
Title I parental involvement services are integrated with other programs’
parental involvement strategies at the school and district level.
6.
The district conducts, with involvement of parents, an annual evaluation of
the content and effectiveness of the parental involvement policy in
improving student achievement and parental involvement. Evaluation
results are used to improve programs and services. 1118(a)(2)(A) – (G)
7.
The district has a system for schools to provide parents with “right to know”
information:
a. Status of school identified for school improvement
b. Notice of teacher qualifications and right of parent to inquire
c. Notice, if applicable, that students are taught by non- highly
qualified teachers for more than four weeks.
1118(d)(3)(B)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Review of documentation and interviews indicate that the school district has not complied with the
following requirement of this standard: #5) The district’s parent involvement activities are not
integrated with other programs.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 22
The district and schools provide materials and training to Title I parents to enable
them to improve their children’s achievement (e.g., literacy training, using
technology to foster parental involvement, frequent meetings with teachers, etc.).
1118(e)(2) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 61 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 23
School Requirements:
1.
The school has a written parent involvement policy that is developed jointly
with, agreed upon, and distributed to parents of participating children.
1118(b)(1) NCLB
2.
Parents are notified of the school’s Title I parent involvement policy in an
understandable format. To the extent practicable, this information is
provided in the language of the home.
1118(b)(1) NCLB
3.
The school implements the following parent involvement requirements:
a.
Convenes an annual informational meeting at a time convenient for
parents;
b.
Provides parents with opportunities for regular meetings regarding
the education of their children; and offers a flexible number of
meetings (e.g., in the early morning or in the evening, etc.);
c.
Involves parents in an organized, ongoing, timely way in the
planning, review, and improvement of school parental involvement
policy and schoolwide programs;
d.
Provides parents with timely information about Title I programs,
descriptions, and an explanation of the Title I curriculum and
assessment procedures; and
e.
Provides parents with materials and training to improve their
children’s achievement.
1118 (c)(1)-(4); 1118 (e)(2) NCLB
4.
Each school develops jointly with parents a School-Parent Compact that
outlines shared responsibilities for improving student achievement and
achieving the state’s high standards.
1118(d) NCLB
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
No
SAFE AND DRUG FREE SCHOOLS
III. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
Legal Standard
SDF 1
The Safe and Drug Free Schools program develops its application through timely
and meaningful consultation with community agencies, parents, students and
representatives from the schools and prevention community.
[Title IV Sec. 4115 (b) (2) (E)]
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 62 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SDF 2
The local education agency coordinates such agency’s programs and projects with
community-wide efforts to achieve SEA’s goals for drug and violence prevention.
[NCLB Title IV Sec. 4114 (c) (1) (B)]
District Response Required:
Rating: Commendable
No
Department of Education Findings:
Based on interviews and documentation, Medford Public Schools participates at an exemplary level
with other agencies in activities that include student, parent and teacher surveys, focus groups,
program development and implementation, writing grants, evaluation and meetings regarding the
prevalence of drugs and violence in the community. The community agencies are informed and
participate in many meetings providing timely and meaningful consultation on the district’s drug and
violence activities. Community agencies/people involved include, but are not limited to the following:
Mayor Michael McGlynn, Medford Health Matters, Police and Fire Departments, Board of Health,
Project Alliance, Office of Diversity, religious leaders, Tri-City Mental Health, Medford Alliance,
Lawrence Memorial Hospital, District Attorney’s Office, Tufts University, Greater Lawrence Family
Health Center, Medford Family Network and the Medford Housing Authority. Some examples of
effective collaboration are: Community wide grants from Medford Health Matters and a policing
grant implementing programs on drug, alcohol and violence prevention programs with activities for
students and parents in the schools. As an extension of the drug prevention initiatives, the SDFS
Coordinator collaborated with many organizations and groups in the Mock Car Accident program.
This provided a realistic presentation on the consequences of drinking and driving, which was,
followed by discussion in the classrooms. Project Safeguard provided DITEP training for school staff,
chemical awareness sessions for parents and students and strengthened Drug and Alcohol Policies,
existing programs, and access to emerging needs to achieve Medford’s goal of “Safeguard our
Children and Youth, Safeguard Our Homes, Safeguard our Schools and Safeguard our Community”.
The Police Department provided several trainings/presentations for parents and students.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SDF 2A
The local education agency coordinates such agency’s programs and projects with
other federal, state and local programs for drug-abuse and violence prevention.
[Title IV Sec. 4114 (c) (1) (B)]
Rating: Commendable
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
Based on interviews, documentation and observation, it is evident that Medford has an exemplary
partnership in collaboration with local agencies implementing local, federal and state programs for
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 63 of 152
drug-abuse and violence prevention for the schools and community. Examples include: Tobacco
Cessation intervention supported by the Department of Public Health enhanced school health services
grant; the Mental Health grant providing Second Step curriculum to preK-3 and training for parents;
the SAMHSA grant through Medford Health Matters providing programs for parents, administration
of the Community that Cares survey for students, and the data analysis; Tri-City Mental Health
provides an outpatient drug counselor at Medford High School; and in coordination with the police
department, 2 grants awarded from the Governor’s Highway Safety Bureau.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SDF 3
There are program activities implemented to promote the involvement of parents.
[Title IV Sec. 4116 (a) (1)]
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
District Response Required:
No
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
III. PARENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
Legal Standard
CTE 6
Parents/guardians, students, teachers, representatives of business and industry, labor
organizations, postsecondary institutions, advisory committees and/or school
councils, representatives of special populations, and other interested individuals are
involved in the development, implementation, and evaluation of career and technical
programs. Perkins Section.135; Chapter.74 Section 6, 603 CMR 4.03 (3)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Parents/guardians, students, teachers, representatives of business and industry, labor
organizations, post secondary institutions, advisory committees and/or school councils,
representatives of special populations, and other interested individuals are involved with the
development, implementation, and evaluation of career/vocational technical education
programs. Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74 Section 6, 603 CMR 4.03 (3)
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
Based on documentation and interviews, there is little evidence of involvement in the development,
implementation, and evaluation of career/vocational technical education programs. Not all program
advisory committees have acquired appropriate representation. In addition, the School Council
responsible for the development of the school improvement plan for both Medford High and Medford
Vocational Technical High School reportedly does not include representation from MVTHS.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 64 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 7
Appropriate information concerning career and technical education programs is
provided to students and to their parents/guardians at least once a year before
students enter the programs, and in no case later than the beginning of the ninth
grade. Such information shall include:
(a) the opportunities available in career and technical education;
(b) eligibility requirements for enrollment in career and technical programs;
(c) specific courses that are available;
(d) employment and/or further education opportunities; and
(e) placement
Perkins Section. 135; Chapter.74 603 CMR 4.03 (4) (a)(b); (6); (7)
District Response Required:
Rating: Partially Implemented
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Appropriate information concerning career/vocational technical education programs is
provided to students and to their parents/guardians at least once a year before students enter
the program and in no case later than the beginning of ninth grade. Such information shall
include:
i)
the opportunities available in career/vocational technical education;
ii)
eligibility requirements for enrollment in career/vocational technical programs;
iii)
specific courses that are available;
iv)
employment and/or further education opportunities; and
v)
placement
Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4 (a)(b;(6);(7)
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
Based on record reviews and interviews with staff and students, information concerning
career/vocational technical education programs is not provided to students and their parents/guardians
in languages other than English. Further, there is no written plan to address this concern.
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
III. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 7
Parent Involvement
The district develops a mechanism for including parents or guardians of LEP
students in matters pertaining to their children’s education.
Authority: Title VI
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 65 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
III. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
Legal Standard
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
There is currently no formal mechanism in place to provide outreach to involve parents or guardians
of LEP students in matters pertaining to their children’s education throughout the school year. In
addition, there is no formal system in place to provide interpreters to translate for parent, who require
language assistance to access and participate in parent activities and parent groups.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 66 of 152
COMPONENT IV: CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
The criteria in this component examine whether the district holds all students to high
expectations and standards and ensures that the program areas reviewed are designed to
maximize student performance within regular education and are implemented according to
specific regulatory requirements with respect to learning time, class size, staffing ratio, and
age spans. The criteria also examine if the district has provided for coordination across the
following program areas:


Special Education (Report Issues # SE 33-42)
Civil Rights Methods of Administration (Report Issues MOA 7A-9)



Title I (Report Issues # TI 24-28)
Safe and Drug Free Schools (Report Issue # SDF 4)
Career and Technical Education (Report Issues # CTE 8-14)

English Learner Education (Report Issues #8-10)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 67 of 152
SPECIAL EDUCATION
IV. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 33
Involvement in the general curriculum
1. District personnel reflect a full understanding of the connection between the
Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks and the expectations of the state for
student performance as well as the rights of students with disabilities to be full
participants in the general curriculum.
2. The district has either aligned its district curriculum with the Frameworks or has
taken steps to provide students (including all students with disabilities) with
essential learning opportunities that prepare the students to reach the state
graduation standards.
3. At least one member of all IEP Teams is familiar with the general curriculum
and is able to discuss an eligible student’s appropriate access to the general
curriculum.
4. In the IEP the district documents the student’s participation in the general
curriculum.
State Regulations
28.05(4)(a) and (b)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.347(a)(1)(i); 300.137
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews indicate that at the middle and high school levels, students placed in resource rooms do not
always have the same access to scheduled classes in the computer labs and/or tech labs.
At the vocational school, interviews indicate that for some students on IEPs, who require Wilson
reading, those services are being provided during their English classes, rather than as a direct
service.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 34
Continuum of alternative services and placements
The district provides or arranges for the provision of each of the elements of the IEPs
of students in need of special education from the ages of three through twenty-one,
ensuring that a continuum of services and alternative placements is available to meet
the needs of all students with disabilities, and takes all steps necessary to ensure
compliance with all elements of the IEPs, including vocational education.
State Regulations
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.551;300.305; 300.123
District Response Required: No
Page 68 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 35
Specialized materials and assistive technology
1.
Specialized materials and equipment specified in IEPs are provided, are of
good quality and are suitable for the role they play in the IEP.
2.
The school district provides evidence that assistive technology is considered
for each eligible student and, if necessary, described in the IEP and provided
by the district.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.308, 34 CFR 300.346
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
Student record review and interviews indicate that IEP Teams do not always consider the student’s
need for assistive technology materials or equipment. Staff lack knowledge regarding the availability
of assistive technology resources and materials within the district, as well as the type of assistive
technology materials and equipment to recommend for students to increase their access to the
curriculum.
*
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 36
IEP implementation, accountability and financial responsibility
1.
The district ensures that IEPs are implemented without delay upon parent
consent.
2.
The district oversees in an ongoing manner the full implementation of each
in-district and each out-of-district IEP it proposes which has been consented
to by a child’s parents.
3.
The district makes a good faith effort to assist the child to achieve the goals
and objectives or benchmarks listed in the IEP.
4.
The district provides all programs and services without expense to the
child’s parents.
5.
Each time the school district proposes to access the parent’s private
insurance to support the costs of IEP implementation, the school district
obtains the parent’s consent and informs the parents that their refusal to
permit the school district to access their private insurance does not relieve
the district of its responsibility to ensure that all required services are
provided at no cost to the parents.
State Regulations
28.06(3)
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.142; 300.350
District Response Required: No
Page 69 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 37
Procedures for approved and unapproved out-of-district placements
1. Individual student program oversight: The school district monitors the provision
of services to and the programs of individual students placed in public and
private out-of-district programs. Documentation of monitoring plans and all
actual monitoring are placed in the files of every eligible student who has been
placed out-of-district. To the extent that this monitoring requires site visits, such
site visits are documented and placed in the students’ files for review. The duty
to monitor out-of-district placements is not delegated to parents or their agents,
to the Department of Education, or to the out-of-district placement.
2. Student right to full procedural protections: The school district retains full
responsibility for ensuring that the student is receiving all special education and
related services in the student's IEP, as well as all procedural protections of law
and regulation. Any Team meetings conducted during the time that a student is
enrolled in the out-of-district program are initiated by the school district in
coordination with the out-of-district placement.
3. Preference to approved programs: The school district, in all circumstances, first
seeks to place a student in a program approved by the Department pursuant to
the requirements of 603 CMR 28.09. Preference is also given to approved
programs located within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts if the choice of
such program is consistent with the needs of the student and the choice of such
program complies with LRE requirements. When an approved program is
available to provide the services on the IEP, the district makes such placement in
the approved program in preference to any program not approved by the
Department.
4. Written contracts: The school district enters into written contracts with all public
and private out-of-district placements. At a minimum, such contracts meet the
content requirements of 28.06(3)(f)(1-5).
5. Use of unapproved programs: A school district that places a student in a program
that has not been approved by the Department according to the requirements
under 603 CMR 28.09 ensures that such programs and services are provided in
appropriate settings by appropriately credentialed staff able to deliver the
services on the student’s IEP. Students placed by the school district in such
programs are entitled to the full protections of state and federal special education
law and regulation.
6. Placement documentation: The following documentation is maintained by the
school district pursuant to its placement of children in unapproved out-of-district
programs:
a.
Search: The Administrator of Special Education documents the
search for and unavailability of a program approved by the Department.
The Administrator places such documentation in the student record.
b.
Evaluation of facility: The Administrator of Special Education or
his/her designee thoroughly evaluates the appropriateness of any
unapproved facility prior to placement of the student in such program.
Such evaluation determines whether the unapproved facility can
appropriately implement the student’s IEP in a safe and educationally
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 70 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
c.
d.
e.
f.
appropriate environment. Such evaluation additionally determines
whether the unapproved facility can and will provide the student with all
the rights that are accorded to the student under state and federal special
education law. Such evaluation is documented in detail and placed in
the student record for review. To the extent that this evaluation requires
a site visit, such site visits are documented and placed in the student
record for review. The duty to evaluate the appropriateness of any
unapproved facility is not delegated to the parents or their agents or the
proposed unapproved facility.
School district approval to operate a private school in
Massachusetts: If services in an unapproved program are provided in a
school setting, the Administrator of Special Education ensures that such
school has received approval from the local school committee under
M.G.L. c.76, §1 and a copy of such approval is retained in the student
record.
Pricing: Pursuant to the requirements for Compliance, Reporting
and Auditing for Human and Social Services at 808 CMR 1.00, the
Administrator obtains pricing forms required to set program prices for
programs receiving publicly funded students. Such pricing forms are
completed by the proposed placement and document that the price
proposed for the student’s tuition is the lowest price charged for similar
services to any student in that program.
Notification of the Department of Education: Prior to placement, if
the Team determines that placement in such facility is appropriate, the
Administrator notifies the Department of the intent to place the student
and the name and location of the proposed placement. In addition, the
Administrator forwards the notice of proposed placement and completed
pricing forms to the Department along with the information on the
proposed terms of the contract that will govern such placement and
documentation of a monitoring plan pursuant to 603 CMR 28.06(3)(b).
The district maintains any documentation of the Department’s
objections to such placement and the steps the district has taken in
regard to such objection. The district maintains documentation of the
approved price for publicly funded students as set by the state agency
responsible for setting program prices.
Out of state programs: If out-of-district programs are provided in a
placement outside of Massachusetts, and such school has not received
approval by the Department under 603 CMR 28.09, the Administrator
of Special Education ensures that such school has received approval
from the host state.
State Regulations
28.02(14), 28.06(3)
Rating: Commendable
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.2(c)
District Response Required:
No
Page 71 of 152
Department of Education Findings:
Based upon interviews and student record review, the district demonstrates excellent practices in the
oversight and monitoring of the IEP process and procedures for students placed in out-of-district
placements. The monitoring plans, progress reports and IEPs are detailed, specific to the student’s
area of educational and/or therapeutic need and rate of progress. There is documented evidence of
the district’s continual attention to the student’s out-of-district services and programs and to the
possible timelines for the engagement of transition activities to bring students back into the district’s
programs.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 38
Educational services in institutional settings (ESIS)
Department of Education responsibility: In cases where the Department provides
certain special education services to eligible students in certain facilities operated by
or under contract with the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Youth
Services, County Houses of Corrections, or the Department of Public Health, the
Department retains the discretion to determine, based upon resources, the type and
amount of special education and related services that it provides in such facilities.
School district responsibility:
1. The district implements its responsibilities to students in institutional settings by
acting on requests for evaluation, issuing proposed IEPs in a timely manner, and
providing special education and/or related services in accordance with state and
federal law.
2. Where a student's IEP requires a type or amount of service that the facility does
not provide, it remains the responsibility of the parent’s school district to
implement the student's IEP by arranging and paying for the provision of such
service(s).
3. The parent’s school district coordinates with the state agency to ensure that the
student receives an evaluation, an annual review, and special education services
as identified at a Team meeting convened by the parent’s school district.
State Regulations
28.06(9)
Federal Requirements
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 39
Procedures used to provide services to eligible students enrolled in private
schools at private expense
1. On or before December 1, the district determines the number of eligible private
school students in consultation with private school representatives.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 72 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
2.
To the extent that the school district provides and pays for special education
services for eligible students enrolled in private schools at private expense,
the following requirements and procedures are implemented:
a. The district provides special education and/or related services designed
to meet the needs of eligible children who are attending private schools at
private expense and whose parents reside in the jurisdiction of the school
district. The school district provides to such children genuine
opportunities to participate in the public school special education
program consistent with state constitutional limitations.
b. The district provides or arranges for the provision of evaluation services
and an IEP for any eligible private school child whose parent resides in
the jurisdiction of the school district. The evaluation may take place in
the public school, the private school, or an appropriate contracted
facility, and the school district ensures that a representative of the child’s
private school is invited to participate as a member of the Team pursuant
to §28.05.
c. The district provides or arranges for the provision of the special
education and/or related services described by the child’s IEP and the
district ensures that special education services funded with state or local
funds are provided in a public school facility or other public or neutral
site. When services are provided using only federal funds, services are
provided on public or private school grounds.
d. The district does not withdraw or withhold services from a child solely
because the school district has met the spending requirements of federal
law.
3. Special education services and/or related services provided by the district to a
private school child are comparable in quality, scope, and opportunity for
participation to that provided to public school children with needs of equal
importance.
4. The district ensures that programs in which both public and private school
children participate do not include classes that are separated on the basis of
school enrollment or the religious affiliation of the children.
5. An expedited special education evaluation, which is limited to a child’s
physician statement unless there is a clear indication of the need or unless the
parents request additional evaluation, is conducted and service provided to
eligible students by the district within 15 calendar days of the school district’s
receipt of the child’s physician statement.
State Regulations
28.03(1)(e); Chapter 71B, section 2
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.450-300.462
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 73 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 40
Instructional grouping requirements for students aged five and older
1. The size and composition of instructional groupings for eligible students
receiving services outside the general education classroom are compatible
with the methods and goals stated in each student's IEP.
2. Instructional grouping size requirements are maximum sizes and the school
district exercises judgment in determining appropriate group size and
supports for smaller instructional groups serving students with complex
special needs.
3. When eligible students are assigned to instructional groupings outside of the
general education classroom for 60% or less of the students’ school
schedule, group size does not exceed eight (8) students with a certified
special educator, twelve (12) students if the certified special educator is
assisted by one aide, and sixteen (16) students if the certified special
educator is assisted by two aides.
4. For eligible students served in settings that are substantially separate, serving
solely students with disabilities for more than 60% of the students’ school
schedule, the district provides instructional groupings that do not exceed
eight (8) students to one certified special educator or twelve (12) students to
a certified special educator and an aide.
5. After the school year has begun, if instructional groups have reached
maximum size as delineated in paragraphs 3 and 4 of this criterion, the
Administrator of Special Education and the certified special educator(s)
providing services in an instructional group may decide to increase the size
of an instructional grouping by no more than two additional students if the
additional students have compatible instructional needs and then can receive
services in their neighborhood school.
6. In such cases, the Administrator provides written notification to the
Department and the parents of all group members of the decision to increase
the instructional group size and the reasons for such decision. Such
increased instructional group sizes are in effect only for the year in which
they are initiated.
7. The district takes all steps necessary to reduce the instructional groups to the
sizes outlined in paragraph 3 or 4 of this criterion for subsequent years.
Such steps are documented by the district.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
28.06(6)
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
Documentation indicates that the district has exceeded the class size requirements for a number of
classes at the high school. In addition, there is a lack of oversight and monitoring regarding
adherence to the class size requirements.
At the middle school when the student enrollment increases to over nine students, the designated
classroom space for the resource room is not adequate to provide instruction to the increased number
of students.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 74 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 41
Age span requirements
The ages of the youngest and oldest child in any instructional grouping do not differ
by more than forty-eight months. A written request for approval of a wider age
range is submitted to the Commissioner of Education in cases where the district
believes it is justified. Such requests are implemented only after approval of the
Department of Education.
State Regulations
28.06(6)(f)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings: Documentation indicates that the district has not adhered to the
age span requirements for a number of classes at the high school level. In addition, there is a lack of
oversight and monitoring regarding adherence to the age span requirements.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 42
Programs for young children three and four years of age
General requirements:
1.
The school district ensures programs are available for eligible
children three and four years of age. Such programs shall be
developmentally appropriate and specially designed for children ages three
and four years.
2.
Where at all possible the school district accepts referrals from the
Department of Public Health, other agencies, and individuals for young
children when or before the child turns two-and-one-half years old in order to
ensure continuity of services and to ensure the development and
implementation of an IEP for eligible children by the date of the child's third
birthday in accordance with federal requirements.
3.
Where appropriate, the school district elects, consistent with federal
requirements to use the format and services of the Individualized Family
Service Plan (IFSP), if appropriate, for an additional year as a means of
transitioning eligible children to public school services.
4.
Where appropriate the Team allows a child to remain in a program
designed for three and four year old children for the duration of the school
year in which the child turns five years old (including the summer following
the date of the child's fifth birthday).
Types of Settings:
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 75 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
5.
6.
Inclusionary programs for young children are located in a setting
that includes children with and without disabilities and meet the following
standards:
a.
Services in such programs are provided in the home, the public
school, Head Start, or a licensed childcare setting.
b.
For public school programs that integrate children with and without
disabilities, the class size does not exceed twenty (20) with one
teacher and one aide and no more than five (5) students with
disabilities. If the number of students with disabilities is six (6) or
seven (7) then the class size does not exceed fifteen (15) students
with one teacher and one aide.
Substantially separate programs for young children are located in a
public school classroom or facility that serves primarily or solely children
with disabilities. Substantially separate programs adhere to the following
standards:
a.
Substantially separate programs are programs in which more than
50% of the children have disabilities.
b.
Substantially separate programs operated by the district limit class
sizes to nine (9) students with one teacher and one aide.
State Regulations
28.06(7)
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.342(c)
District Response Required:
No
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION
IV. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
Legal Standard
MOA 7A
School Year Schedules
1. Before the beginning of each school year, the school district sets a school
year schedule for each school. The school year includes at least 185 school
days for students in grades 1-12 at each elementary, middle, and secondary
school in the district, and these schools are in operation for at least 180 days
a year for these students.
2. The school district ensures that unless his or her IEP or Section 504
Accommodation Plan provides otherwise, each elementary school student is
scheduled for at least 900 hours of structured learning time a year and each
secondary school student is scheduled for at least 990 hours of structured
learning time a year, within the required school year schedule. Where the
school district operates separate middle schools, it designates each one as
either elementary or secondary.
3. Where the school district sets a separate school year and school day schedule
for kindergarten programs, it provides at least 425 hours of structured
learning time a year. If the district schedules two sessions of kindergarten a
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 76 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION
IV. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
Legal Standard
day, it ensures equal instructional time for all kindergarten students.
M.G.L. c. 69, s. 1G; 603 CMR 27.03, 27.04
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 7B
Structured Learning Time
1. The school district ensures that its structured learning time is time during
which students are engaged in regularly scheduled instruction, learning, or
assessments within the curriculum of core subjects and other subjects as
defined in 603 CMR 27.02 (including physical education, required by
M.G.L. c. 71, s. 3). The district’s structured learning time may include
directed study (activities directly related to a program of studies, with a
teacher available to assist students), independent study (a rigorous,
individually designed program under the direction of a teacher, assigned a
grade and credit), technology-assisted learning, presentations by persons
other than teachers, school-to-work programs, and statewide student
performance assessments.
2. The district ensures that its structured learning time does not include time at
breakfast or lunch, passing between classes, in homeroom, at recess, in nondirected study periods (study halls), participating in optional school
programs, or receiving school services such as health screening, speech, or
physical and occupational therapy, except where those services are
prescribed by a student’s IEP or Section 504 Accommodation Plan.
3. The hours spent in any type of structured learning time are verified by the
school district. Where the school district counts independent study or a
school-to-work program as structured learning time, it has guidelines that
explain clearly how hours spent by students are verified.
M.G.L. c. 69, s. 1G; 603 CMR 27.02, 27.04
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 77 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 7C
Early Release of High School Seniors
When the school district schedules the early release at the end of the year of the
senior class of a high school, it does so in accordance with a written policy that
conforms with Board of Education requirements under 603 CMR 27.05, ensuring
that neither the conclusion of the seniors’ school year nor graduation is more than 12
school days before the regular scheduled closing date of that school.
M.G.L. c. 69, s. 1G; 603 CMR 27.05
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 8
Accessibility of extracurricular activities
Extracurricular activities sponsored by the district are nondiscriminatory in that:
the school provides equal opportunity for all students to participate in intramural and
interscholastic sports;
extracurricular activities or clubs sponsored by the school do not exclude students on
the basis of race, sex, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or
homelessness.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(a), (b); Title IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR
106.31, 106.41; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.4,104.37(a), (c); Title II:
42 U.S.C. 12132; 28 CFR 35.130; NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 721; Mass. Const.
amend. art 114; M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.06
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required: No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 9
Hiring and employment practices of prospective employers of students
1. The district requires employers recruiting at the school to sign a statement
that the employer complies with applicable federal and state laws prohibiting
discrimination in hiring or employment practices.
2. Prospective employers to whom this criterion applies include those
participating in career days and work-study and apprenticeship training
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 78 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
programs, as well as those offering cooperative work experience.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(b)(1),(2); Title IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34
CFR 106.38; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.4(b)(1)(v), 104.37(a); Title II:
42 U.S.C. 12132; 28 CFR 35.130(b)(1)(v); M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.07(5)
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings: Refer to finding under CTE 12
TITLE 1
IV. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 24 - TAS
The district implements effective instructional strategies that are based on
scientifically-based research that:
a.
give primary consideration to extended learning time;
b.
help provide an accelerated, high quality curriculum; and
c.
minimize the removal of students from the classroom during regular hours.
1115(c)(1)(C) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 25 –
TAS/SWP
The school district provides opportunities for students receiving Title I services to
participate in extended day/week/year programs and activities that the district offers.
1114(b)(1)(B)(ii)(II); 1115(c)(1)(C)(i) NCLB
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 26 - SWP
For each school a comprehensive Schoolwide Program (SWP) plan has been
developed with the involvement of the community, those served by the program, and
the individuals who will implement the plan, including:
1.
a year of planning,
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 79 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
teachers, principals, and other staff, and where appropriate,
pupil services personnel,
parents,
secondary school students, if applicable,
revision, as necessary, by the school, and
availability of the plan to parents and the public in a language that
parents can understand.
1114(b)(2)(B)(ii-iv) NCLB
District Response Required: No
Rating: Not Applicable
Department of Education Findings:
The district does not have any School-wide Programs in the Title I eligible schools.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 27 - SWP
The SWP plan includes a comprehensive needs assessment of the entire school that
is based upon information on the performance of students in relation to the state
academic content standards.
1114(b)(1)(A) NCLB
District Response Required: No
Rating: Not Applicable
Department of Education Findings:
The district does not have any School-wide Programs in the Title I eligible schools
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 28- SWP
In providing technical assistance and support to schoolwide programs, the district
ensures that the programs and plans contain all ten required schoolwide components,
and are designed to ensure that each school will make Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP).
1112(c)(1)(C); 1114(b)(1) and (2) NCLB
District Response Required: No
Rating: Not Applicable
Department of Education Findings:
The district does not have any School-wide Programs in the Title I eligible schools.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 80 of 152
SAFE AND DRUG FREE SCHOOLS
IV. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SDF 4
Local SDFSCA activities (where applicable) are integrated with the following
federal programs under No Child Left Behind (NCLB):
 Title I (helping disadvantaged children meet high standards);
 Title II (professional development);
 Title IV B 21st Century Learning Center programs
 Title V (innovative education program strategies);
[Title IV Sec. 4114 (d) (2) (A)]
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
IV. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 8
Programs are structured to improve academic and technical skills of all students.
Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4); 4.06
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Programs are structured to improve academic and technical skills of all students.
Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4); 4.06
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
Based on interviews, the vast majority of staff, including administration and community partners,
verbalized low expectations of Medford Vocational Technical High School (MVTHS) students,
describing them as “unmotivated”, “narrow,” “low level”, “not college material”. Comparison and
analysis of print materials from both high schools supports this. For example, MVTHS curriculum
brochure describes its Dual Curriculum Program as distinguishing students planning to pursue post
secondary education from those who are not.
Based on record reviews and interviews, while a number of academic and technical courses and
programs provide evidence of challenging coursework and high expectations, this was not true of all
courses and programs. Several teachers do not assign homework, while others reported being
satisfied if students attempted the work, citing students’ work demands and personal challenges as
obstacles.
Although the Program of Studies and students’ schedules provide an opportunity to take Advanced
Placement and Honors level courses at Medford High School, career/vocational technical education
students are not expected or encouraged to do so.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 81 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 9
Technology is used to improve academic and technical education. Perkins Section
135; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Technology is used to improve academic and technical education.
Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4)
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
Based on observations and interviews with staff and students, there is limited and inequitable access
to technology (despite the 2001 Medford Vocational Technical High School Corrective Action Plan).
In interviews with staff, it was reported that computer literacy is not required at MVTHS since it is
“taught in the middle schools”; however, high school staff report a computer literacy course is a
requirement of graduation at Medford High School.
The computer opportunities that do exist (e.g., in the MHS library) are rarely promoted and utilized
by career/vocational technical education students. While most programs have one or two computers,
there is no evidence in student portfolios or competency checklists of computer based skill
expectations. It was reported that computers once available in the Technology Enhanced Academics
(TEA) classes were vandalized. To date, no efforts have been made to restore or remedy the problem.
The new Marketing program, explored this year by ninth graders, depends upon the same technology
resources as the TEA. Based on interviews with students and staff, few students chose to enroll in the
Marketing program, in part due to insufficient technology.
Although the district’s 2001 Corrective Action Plan referenced an online Advanced Placement course,
there was no evidence that this course was an option accessed by MVTHS students.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 10
Linkages between secondary and postsecondary programs exist and are accessible to
all students.
Perkins Sections 13, 201; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4)
District Response Required:
Rating: Partially Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Yes
Page 82 of 152
Department of Education Findings:
Linkages between secondary and postsecondary programs exist and are accessible to all
students. Perkins Sections 13, 201; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4)
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
While articulation agreements with registered apprenticeship programs and opportunities to visit
postsecondary institutions are in place for some programs, such as HVAC, postsecondary linkages are
largely under-developed and under-utilized. Many staff describe Medford Vocational Technical High
School students, with the support of their parents/guardians, as being more motivated to work.
In contrast, interviews with parents/guardians revealed that all expected their sons/daughters to
pursue postsecondary education.
All students enrolled in programs that have articulation agreements are provided information on
Tech-Prep, but in English only. While several students participate in Tech-Prep activities very few
registration forms have the required parent/guardian signature. Additionally, there is little evidence
of the required encouragement and support of Tech-Prep students transitioning to postsecondary
education.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 11
All students are provided with strong experience in, and a comprehensive
understanding of, all aspects of an industry (AAI). Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74
603 CMR 4.03 (4) (7)
Definition: “All aspects…” means strong experience in, and comprehensive
understanding of, the particular industry that a student is preparing to enter.
Programs must provide students with understanding and experience in technical
skills, business skills related to the particular industry (planning, management,
financial, labor, legal, ethical, community), as well as health and safety, underlying
principals of technology and environmental issues related to that industry.
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
All students are provided with strong experience in and understanding of all aspects of an
industry. Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4)(7)
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
Staff interviews and classroom observations indicate that curricula inconsistently include” All Aspects
of Industry”.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 83 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 12
Cooperative Education activities are in compliance with 603 CMR 4.03 (7)
Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (7), Chapter 385 of the Acts of 2002
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Cooperative education Activities are in compliance with 603 CMR 4.03 (7), Chapter 385 of the
Acts of 2002. 603 CMR 4.03 (7) Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (7); Chapter 385 of the Acts of 2002
Chapter 74 and Section 385 Criteria

Based on documentation review and interviews, while the Cooperative Education program is
described as being "under close supervision of the coordinator", there is little, and in many
cases, no management and supervision of approximately 20 students at work sites due to the
fact that the coordinator is also a full time Vocational Technical Education (VTE) teacher.

Based upon interviews at worksites with students and employers, students are not provided
safety orientation from the employer when beginning the cooperative education position.

There was no evidence of orientation or training on child labor laws provided by the school
(or references to resource materials explaining the child labor laws), although employers
agree to meet the provisions of these laws on the Worksite Agreement Form. Further, the
Worksite Agreement Form contains language about the child labor laws that is overly general
and technically incorrect. Based upon a review of files, some Worksite Agreement Forms were
not signed by participating employers.

The circumstances under which a CORI check may occur are not clear in the Cooperative
Education policy.

Based on interviews, the Cooperative Education Director and VTE teachers visit worksites on
a sporadic basis due to time constraints. While efforts are made to track student progress by
telephone, students reported few to no visits from their VTE teachers at the work site.

Based on documentation and interviews, evaluation does not include assessment of technical
competency attainment. Skills to be acquired by students are not listed on the written
agreement.

MVTHS has five students with disabilities participating in Cooperative Education. While the
Cooperative Education Director informally notifies the employer of some of the
accommodations a student may require at the work site, there is limited communication and
no formal collaboration with the special education department.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 84 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 13
Required professional development is provided to staff. Perkins Section 135
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Required professional development is provided to staff. Perkins Section 135
Perkins and Chapter 74 Criteria:
Based on interviews and documentation, while staff have access to district-wide and Perkins-funded
professional development, it is not planned and provided based on data analyses or the academic and
technical needs of CVTE students. Further, while most staff have recently completed professional
development plans, there is little evidence that professional development is guided or monitored.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 14
Individuals who are members of special populations {that includes individuals with
disabilities; individuals from economically disadvantaged families, including foster
children; individuals preparing for nontraditional by gender training and
employment; single parents, including single pregnant women; displaced
homemakers; and individuals with other barriers to educational achievement
including individuals with limited English proficiency} are provided with equal
access to recruitment activities, admission and opportunities to a full range of
courses of study without regard to race, color, gender, religion, national origin,
English language proficiency, disability, or sexual orientation, and with programs
that enable them to meet or exceed state adjusted levels of performance. Perkins
Section 122, Chapter 76, section 5 [Chapter 622], Title IX; M.G.L. c.74 603 CMR
4.03 (4)(6)(7)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Individuals who are part of special populations (that include individuals with disabilities;
individuals from economically disadvantaged families, including foster children; individuals
preparing for nontraditional training and employment; single parents/guardians, including
single pregnant women; displaced homemakers; and individuals with other barriers to
educational achievement including individuals with limited English proficiency, are provided
equal access to recruitment activities, admission and opportunities to a full range of courses of
study without regard to race, color, gender, religion, national origin, English language
proficiency, disability, or sexual orientation, and with programs that enable them to meet or
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 85 of 152
exceed state adjusted levels of performance. Perkins Section 122, Chapter 76, section 5 (Chapter
622), Title IX; M.G.L. c.74 603 CMR 4.03 (4)(6)(7)
Perkins Criteria:
Documentation and interviews indicate that students with disabilities are not taught to the same
challenging standards, as are all other students at Medford Vocational Technical High School.
Several students with disabilities are not engaged in the full life of the school nor are they receiving
the appropriate level and quality of instruction. For example, one class of students in The Learning
Group (as described by the special education teacher, as an “incentive”), are rewarded for good
behavior by going to the cafeteria for breakfast mid-morning, during academic class time, while the
remaining 15 minutes of class time (described as being too short for a lesson) was used to allow
students to develop skills in socializing with classmates.
Technical teachers are not consistently provided information on students with IEP’s in a timely
manner.
In addition to students with limited English proficiency not being provided equal access to
career/vocational technical information. MVTHS does not have a plan to ensure that students with
limited English proficiency, and their parents/guardians, receive counseling and postsecondary
information in a language they can understand.
While there was nontraditional by gender enrollment in a majority of the career/vocational technical
programs, review of Local Plan data and interviews demonstrated a clear need for professional
development to support students enrolled in programs nontraditional for their gender.
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
IV. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
Legal Standard
ELE 8
Declining Entry to a Program
The district provides English language support to students whose parents have
declined entry to a sheltered English immersion, two-way bilingual, or other
ELE program. (See Implementation Guidance below.)
Authority: Title VI
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Documentation shows that the district has written procedures and translated documents in place when
a parent declines entry of a Limited English Proficient student into a program required by Chapter
71A. . However, interviews and student record review indicate that these procedures are not in
practice system-wide and the district has not designated personnel to be responsible for their
implementation.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 86 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 9
Instructional Grouping
1. The district only groups students of different ages together in
instructional settings if their levels of English proficiency are similar.
2. The district’s grouping of students ensures that LEP students receive
effective content instruction at appropriate academic levels that is based
on the Massachusetts curriculum frameworks.
Authority: G.L. c. 71A, § 4; Title VI
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Documentation and interviews indicate that the district has based its curriculum on the Massachusetts
Curriculum Frameworks and the English Language Proficiency Benchmarks and Outcomes.
However, interviews also indicate that students of differing ages, are not always grouped according
to similar levels of English language proficiency, but rather with mixed proficiency levels.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 10
Parental Notification
1. Upon placement in the ELE program, a notice is mailed to the parents or
guardians written in the primary/home language, as well as in English,
that informs parents of:
(a) the reasons for identification of the student as Limited English
Proficient (LEP);
(b) the child’s level of English proficiency;
(c) program placement and/or the method of instruction used in the
program;
(d) how the program will meet the educational strengths and needs of
the student;
(e) how the program will specifically help the child learn English;
(f) the specific exit requirements; and
(g) the parents’ right to apply for a waiver (see ELE 4), or to decline to
enroll their child in the program (see ELE 9).
(All districts need to comply with a-c and g. Title III districts must
comply with a-g. Title III districts must send parental notification no
later than 30 days after the beginning of the school year.)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 87 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
2. The district will provide to parents and guardians of LEP students, report
cards, and progress reports in the same manner and with the same
frequency as general education reporting. The reports shall, to the
maximum extent possible, be written in a language understandable to the
parent/guardian.
Authority: NCLB, Title III; c. 71A, §7; 603 CMR 14.02
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
The parental notification letter does not contain the above required elements: the ways in which the
program will meet the student’s educational needs and strengths, and the specific exit criteria for the
program in which the student is placed.
Report cards and progress reports are not always documented in the student record and are not
always translated in the primary language of the home, when necessary and appropriate.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 88 of 152
COMPONENT V: STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES
The criteria in this component examine whether the district has ensured that all students
have equal opportunity and access to programs or services in the program areas listed
below:


Special Education (Report Issues # SE 43-49A)
Civil Rights Methods of Administration (Report Issues MOA 10A –17A)


Title I (Report Issues # TI 29A-29B)
Career and Technical Education (Report Issues # CTE 15-16)

English Learner Education (Report Issues # ELE 11-13)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 89 of 152
SPECIAL EDUCATION
V. STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 43
Behavioral interventions
For a student whose behavior impedes their learning or the learning of others, the
Team considers the student’s behavior including positive behavioral interventions,
ability to follow school discipline codes, any needed code modifications and the
possible need for a functional behavioral assessment.
State Regulations
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
300.346
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
IEP Teams consider the individual student’s need for behavioral intervention and incorporate the
recommended goals and accommodations into the student’s IEP and behavior plan for students, who
are placed in district-wide behavioral programs and at the alternative schools. However, for students
placed in full and partial inclusion programs, IEP Teams do not always consider the student’s need
for social-emotional and/or behavioral interventions and if recommended, do not always include
goals and services into the student’s IEP to address the above needs.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 44
Procedure for recording suspensions
The district has a procedure to record the number and duration of suspensions,
including any suspensions from any part of the student’s IEP program (including
transportation).
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.121(d)(2)
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 90 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 45
Procedures for suspension up to 10 days and after 10 days: General
requirements
1. All students, including eligible students with disabilities, receive prior written
notice regarding the school’s Code of Conduct.
2. The school’s Code of Conduct includes required procedural safeguards such as
opportunity for a hearing (per Goss v. Lopez).
3. Any eligible student may be suspended up to 10 days in any school year without
implementation of procedures described in criterion SE 46 below.
4. After a student with special needs has been suspended for 10 days in any school
year, during any subsequent removal the public school provides sufficient
services for the student to continue to receive a free and appropriate public
education.
5. The school provides additional procedural safeguards for students with
disabilities prior to any suspension beyond 10 consecutive days or more than 10
cumulative days (if there is a pattern of suspension) in any school year.
State Requirements
M.G.L. Ch. 76, Sections 16-18
and Ch. 71, Section 37 H
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.519-300.529
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 46
Procedures for suspension of students with disabilities when suspensions exceed
10 consecutive school days or a pattern has developed for suspensions exceeding
10 cumulative days; responsibilities of the Team; responsibilities of the district
1. A suspension of longer than 10 consecutive days or a series of suspensions that
are shorter than 10 consecutive days but constitute a pattern are considered to
represent a change in placement.
2. Prior to a suspension that constitutes a change in placement of a student with
disabilities, the Team convenes
a.
to develop or review a functional behavioral assessment of the
student’s behavior to modify a behavior intervention plan or develop
an assessment plan;
b.
to identify appropriate alternative educational setting(s); and
c.
to determine the relationship between the disability and the behavior
- “a manifestation decision” (Is IEP appropriate? Is placement
appropriate? If there was a behavior plan, was it implemented? Does
student understand impact and consequences of his/her behavior?
Can student control behavior?).
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 91 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
3. If the Team determines that the behavior is NOT a manifestation of the
disability, then the district may suspend or expel the student consistent with
policies applied to any student without disabilities, except that the district must
still offer an appropriate education program to the student with disabilities that
may be in some other setting.
4. Regardless of the manifestation determination, the district may place the student
in an interim alternative educational setting (as determined by the Team) for up
to 45 days
a.
if the behavior involves weapons or illegal drugs or another
controlled substance while at school or a school function; or
b.
if the district provides evidence that the student is “substantially
likely” to injure him/herself or others and a hearing officer orders
the alternative placement; and
c.
the interim alternative education setting enables the student to
continue in the general curriculum, to continue receiving services
identified on the IEP, and provides services to address the problem
behavior.
5. If the Team determines that the behavior IS a manifestation of the disability,
then the district takes steps (with the consent of the parent) to correct the IEP,
the placement, or the behavior intervention plan.
6. The school district provides written notice to the parent of all rights to appeal
and to an expedited hearing. If the parent chooses to appeal, during the appeal
the student stays put in the placement on the last accepted IEP or the interim
alternative placement, unless the parent and the school district agree otherwise.
State Regulations
Rating: Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.519-300.528
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 47
Procedural requirements applied to students not yet determined to be eligible
for special education
1. If, prior to the disciplinary action, a district had knowledge that the student may
be a student with a disability, then the district makes all protections available to
the student until and unless the student is subsequently determined not to be
eligible. The district may be considered to have prior knowledge if:
a.
The parent had expressed concern in writing; or
b.
The parent had requested an evaluation; or
c.
School district staff had expressed concern that the student had a
disability.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 92 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
2. If the district had no reason to consider the student disabled, and the parent
requests an evaluation subsequent to the disciplinary action, the district must
have procedures to conduct an expedited evaluation to determine eligibility. If
the student is found eligible, then he/she receives all procedural protections
subsequent to the finding of eligibility.
3. The school district has developed procedures consistent with federal
requirements to expedite evaluations.
State Regulations
Rating: Implemented
Federal Requirements
20 U.S.C. Chapter 33, Section 1415(k);
34 CFR 300.527
District Response Required: No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 48
FAPE (Free, appropriate, public education): Equal opportunity to participate
in educational, nonacademic, extracurricular and ancillary programs, as well as
participation in regular education
All students receiving special education, regardless of placement, shall have an equal
opportunity to participate in and, if appropriate, receive credit for the vocational,
supportive, or remedial services that may be available as part of the general
education program as well as the non-academic and extracurricular programs of the
school.
Programs, services and activities include, but are not limited to:
1. art and music
2. vocational education, industrial arts, and consumer and homemaking education
3. work study and employment opportunities
4. counseling services available at all levels in the district
5. health services
6. transportation
7. recess and physical education, including adapted physical education
8. athletics and recreational activities
9. school-sponsored groups or clubs
10. meals
State Regulations
28.06(5)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.121; 300.300-313
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to CTE 16 regarding the limited access for students with more significant disabilities to
vocational technical programs, as well as work-study and employment opportunities.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 93 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 49
Related services
For each student with special education needs found to require related services, the
school district provides or arranges for the provision of transportation and such
developmental, corrective, and other supportive services as are required to assist a
student to benefit from special education or to access the general curriculum, and
includes:
1. speech-language pathology and audiology services
2. psychological services
3. physical therapy
4. occupational therapy
5. recreation, including therapeutic recreation
6. early identification and assessment of disabilities in children
7. counseling services, including rehabilitation counseling
8. orientation and mobility services (peripatology)
9. medical services for diagnostic or evaluation purposes
10. school health services
11. social work services in schools, and
12. parent counseling and training.
State Regulations
28.02(19)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.24
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Student record review and interviews indicate that when counseling services are considered by the
IEP Team and provided to the students, the service is not always documented in the student’s IEP.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 49A
Special Transportation
If the IEP specifies that the student’s disability requires transportation or specialized
transportation arrangements in order to benefit from special education, the district
implements these provisions of the student’s IEP.
1. The Team determines necessary modifications, special equipment, assistance,
need for qualified attendants on vehicles, and any particular precautions required
by the student and documents such determinations in the student's IEP. If
specialized arrangements can be provided on regular transportation vehicles, the
school district makes such arrangements.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 94 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
2. The district arranges to have eligible students who use wheelchairs transported in
vehicles that do not require such children to be removed from their wheelchairs
in order to enter or leave the vehicles; provided, however, that this requirement
is not applicable where a Team or the student’s physician recommends that the
student regularly transfer in and out of conventional vehicles to or from a
wheelchair for therapeutic or for independence training reasons.
3. The Team specifies whether the student requires assistance in or out of the
home, on or off of the vehicle, and in or out of the school. If such assistance is
specified, the district ensures that it is provided.
4. The Team specifies if the student has a particular need or problem that may
cause difficulties during transportation, such as seizures, a tendency for motion
sickness, behavioral concerns, or communication disabilities.
5. The school district does not allow transportation considerations to influence,
modify, or determine the educational program, including the length of the school
day, required by any student.
State Regulations
28.05(5)(b)
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.24(b)(15)
District Response Required:
No
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION
V. STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES
Legal Standard
MOA 10A
Handbooks and codes of conduct
1. The district has a code of conduct for students and one for teachers. The
principal of every school containing grades 9-12 prepares, in consultation with
the school council, a student handbook containing the student code of conduct
and distributes it to each student annually, as well as to parents and school
personnel; the school council reviews and revises the student code of conduct
every year. The principal of every school containing other grades distributes the
district’s student code of conduct to students, parents, and personnel annually. At
the request of a parent or student whose primary language is not English, a
handbook or student code of conduct is translated into that language.
2. Student codes of conduct contain:
a)
procedures assuring due process in disciplinary proceedings and
b)
appropriate procedures for the discipline of students with special
needs and students with Section 504 Accommodation Plans.
3. Handbooks and codes of conduct reference M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5 and contain:
a)
a nondiscrimination policy that is consistent with M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5,
b)
the school’s procedure for accepting, investigating and resolving
complaints alleging discrimination or harassment; and
c)
the disciplinary measures that the school may impose if it
determines that harassment or discrimination has occurred.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 95 of 152
and affirms the
CRITERION
NUMBER
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION
V. STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES
Legal Standard
Section 504; M.G.L. c. 71, s. 37H; 603 CMR 26.08
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
The district handbooks do not contain grievance procedures that clearly delineate the grievance
process, including the required steps and timeframe to be implemented when a complaint is filed with
key district personnel. In addition, the handbooks do not describe the consequences that would result
from the different violations listed in the discipline code, including the suspension procedures and
procedural safeguards assuring due process in disciplinary proceedings per Goss vs. Lopez and
M.G.L., s. 37H.
In addition, there was no evidence that district handbooks have been translated for parents whose
primary language is not English or that there is a process in place for parents/guardians, whose
primary language is not English, to request a translated copy of the handbook, including the student
code of conduct.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 11A
Designation of liaison/coordinator(s); grievance procedures
The district has designated one or more staff persons to serve as liaison for homeless
students, carrying out the duties described in NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(6),
and to serve as coordinator for compliance with its responsibilities under Title IX,
Section 504, and (if it employs 50 or more persons) Title II.
The district has adopted and published grievance procedures for students and for
employees providing for prompt and equitable resolution of complaints alleging
discrimination based on sex or disability.
Title IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.8; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.7;
Title II: 42 U.S.C. 12132; 28 CFR 35.107; NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec.
722(g)(1)(J)(ii)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to MOA 10A regarding grievances procedures.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 96 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 12A
Annual and continuous notification concerning nondiscrimination and
coordinators
1. If the district offers vocational education programs, it advises students, parents,
employees and the general public before the beginning of each school year that
all vocational opportunities will be offered regardless of race, color, national
origin, sex or disability. The notice includes a brief summary of program
offerings and admission criteria and the name(s), office address(es), and phone
number(s) of the person(s) designated under MOA 11A to coordinate
compliance under Title IX and Section 504.
2. In all cases, the district takes continuing steps to notify applicants, students,
parents, and employees (including those with impaired vision or hearing), as
well as unions or professional organizations holding collective bargaining or
professional agreements with the district, that it does not discriminate on the
basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or disability. This notice, also, includes
the name(s), office address(es), and phone number(s) of the person(s) designated
under MOA 11A to coordinate compliance under Title IX and Section 504.
3. Written materials and other media used to publicize a school include a notice
that the school does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin,
sex, disability, religion, or sexual orientation.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.6(d); Title IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR
106.8(a), 106.9; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.8; M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5; 603
CMR 26.02(2)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to finding under CTE 4 regarding the vocational school handbook.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 13
Availability of information and counseling on general curricular and
occupational/vocational opportunities
Students from linguistic, racial, and ethnic minorities; males; females; homeless
students; and students with disabilities all receive, in grades 7-12, the same
information and counseling as other students on the full range of general curricular
and any occupational/vocational opportunities available to them.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(a), (b); Title IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR
106.31, 106.36; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.4, 104.37(b); Title II: 42
U.S.C. 12132; 28 CFR 35.130; NCLB: Title III, Part A, Sec. 3121(c)(1)(C); Title X,
Part C, Sec. 721; Mass. Const. amend. art. 114; M.G.L. c. 71A, s. 7; c. 76, s. 5; 603
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 97 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CMR 26.03
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews and documentation indicate that the district has no system in place for limited English
proficient students to receive information and counseling in a language that they can understand.
Refer to finding under CTE 7and CTE 14.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 14
Counseling and counseling materials free from bias and stereotypes
To ensure that counseling and counseling materials are free from bias and
stereotypes on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, sexual
orientation, disability, and homelessness, all counselors:
1. encourage students to consider programs of study, courses, extracurricular
activities, and occupational opportunities on the basis of individual interests,
abilities, and skills;
2. examine testing materials for bias and counteract any found bias when
administering tests and interpreting test results;
3. communicate effectively with limited-English-proficient and disabled
students and facilitate their access to all programs and services offered by
the district;
4. provide limited-English-proficient students with the opportunity to receive
counseling in their primary language;
5. support students in educational and occupational pursuits that are
nontraditional for their gender.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(a), (b); EEOA: 20 U.S.C. 1703(f); Title
IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.31, 106.36; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR
104.4, 104.37; Title II: 42 U.S.C. 12132; 28 CFR 35.130, 35.160; NCLB: Title III,
Part A, Sec. 3121(c)(1)(C); Title X, Part C, Sec. 721; Mass. Const. amend. art. 114;
M.G.L. c. 71A, s. 7; c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.04, 26.07(8)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to findings under CTE 14 and MOA 13 regarding the provision of guidance and counseling
services to limited English proficient students in their primary language, when necessary and
appropriate.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 98 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 14A
Policies and practices to prevent stigmatization and segregation of homeless students
The school district has adopted policies and practices to ensure that homeless students are not
stigmatized or segregated on the basis of their being homeless.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(1)(J) (i)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 14B
Comparability of services for homeless students
If they meet any eligibility criteria, homeless students are provided services
comparable to services offered to other students in the school, including:
Title I services;
educational programs for students with disabilities;
educational programs for students with limited English proficiency;
programs in vocational and technical education; and
programs for gifted and talented students.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722 (g)(4)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 15
Non-discriminatory administration of scholarships, prizes and awards
Scholarships, prizes and awards sponsored or administered by the district are free of
restrictions based upon race, color, sex, religion, national origin, sexual orientation
or disability.
Schools may post or print information regarding private restricted scholarships as
long as no preferential treatment is given to any particular scholarship offered and as
long as the school does not endorse or recommend any such scholarship nor advise
or suggest to a particular student that he or she apply for such a scholarship.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3; Title IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.31,
106.37; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.4(b)(1)(v); Title II: 42 U.S.C.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 99 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
12132; 28 CFR 35.130(b)(1)(v); Mass. Const. amend. art. 114; M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5;
603 CMR 26.07(7)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews and the review of documentation showed no evidence that information regarding the
availability of individual scholarships, prizes and awards is translated into languages other than
English or that a protocol is in place for making this information available to limited English
proficient students in a language that they could understand.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 16
Notice to students 16 or over leaving school without a high school diploma,
certificate of attainment, or certificate of completion
1. Within ten days from a student’s fifteenth consecutive unexcused absence, the
school provides written notice to students age 16 or over and their parents or
guardians. The notice is in English and the family’s native language and states
that the student and the parent or guardian may meet with a representative of the
district within ten days from the date the notice was sent. At the request of the
parent or guardian, the district may consent to an extension of the time for the
meeting of not longer than fourteen days.
2. At the meeting the participants discuss the reasons that the student is leaving
school and alternative educational or other placements. The student and parent or
guardian are told that attendance is voluntary after the student turns 16 but are
also informed of the student’s right to return to school.
M.G.L. c. 76, ss. 5, 18; St. 1965, c. 741
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 17A
Use of physical restraint on any student enrolled in a publicly-funded education
program
1.
The district has developed and implemented staff training at least annually on
the use of restraint consistent with regulatory requirements. Such training
occurs within the first month of each school year and, for employees hired
after the school year begins, within a month of their employment.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 100 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
2.
3.
4.
5.
The district administers physical restraint on students only when needed to
protect a student and/or a member of the school community from imminent,
serious, physical harm. The district implements restraint procedures
consistent with Department of Education regulations in order to prevent or
minimize any harm to the student as a result of the use of physical restraint.
The district has developed written procedures regarding appropriate
responses to student behavior that may require immediate intervention. Such
procedures are annually reviewed and provided to school staff and made
available to parents of enrolled students.
The district has developed and implemented reporting requirements and
procedures for administrators, parents and the Department of Education
consistent with the regulations.
The district has developed and implemented any applicable individual waiver
procedures consistent with the regulations.
M.G.L. c. 71, s. 37G; 603 CMR 46.00
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
District Response Required:
No
TITLE 1
V. STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES
Legal Standard
TI 29A
1. Appropriate officials from private schools are informed and consulted about
the availability of Title I services. Evidence of appropriate communication is
maintained on file.
2. Written affirmation is obtained and signed by officials of each participating
private school, confirming that required consultation has occurred.
1120 NCLB; 1421-1426 NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 29B
1. Appropriate officials from Neglected or Delinquent (N or D) facilities are
informed and consulted about the availability of Title I services. A contract
exists between the district and the N or D facility, if applicable.
2. The N or D program provides the appropriate academic and support services
to enhance student achievement and provides a successful transition to noninstitutional settings for the participants.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 101 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
1120 NCLB; 1421-1426 NCLB
Rating: Not Applicable
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
There are no neglected or delinquent facilities in the district.
CRITERION
NUMBER
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
Legal Standard
CTE 15
Programs and services exist that support student participation in and completion of
nontraditional by gender training and employment activities. Perkins Section 135;
Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4) (7)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Programs and services exist that support student participation in and completion of
nontraditional by gender training and employment activities. Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74
603CMR 4.03 (4)(7)
Perkins Criteria:
Documentation provided by the district included an anti-harassment/EEO policy, however there are
no support services for students participating in programs nontraditional for their gender.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 16
The needs of students in alternative education programs are adequately addressed.
Perkins Section 135
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
The needs of students in alternative education programs are adequately addressed.
Perkins Section 135
Perkins Criteria:
Based on interviews and a review of documentation, while there are several options within the district
for students with more significant needs, not all students enrolled in these programs have full access
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 102 of 152
to career/vocational technical programs and activities. For example, students in the Learning Group
typically have access only to the exploratory program. Further, while students attending the Curtis
Tufts Alternative High School can explore the Woodworking program, they currently do not have
equal access to other Medford Vocational Technical High School vocational technical programs.
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
V. STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES
Legal Standard
ELE 11
Equal Access to Academic Programs and Services
1. The districts does not segregate LEP students from their English-speaking peers,
except when necessary, to implement an English learner education program.
2. The district ensures that LEP students participate fully with their Englishspeaking peers and are provided support in non-core regular public school
courses.
3. The district ensures that LEP students have the opportunity to receive academic
support services, such as guidance and counseling, in the student’s primary
language.
4. The district ensures that LEP students are taught to the same academic standards
and curriculum frameworks as all students, and provides the same opportunities
to master such standards and frameworks as other students, including the
opportunity to enter academically advanced classes, receive credit for work
done, and have access to the full range of programs.
5. The district provides access to the full range of academic opportunities and
supports afforded non-LEP students, such as those outlined in the District
Curriculum Accommodation Plan (DCAP), access to special education services,
and the implementation of Section 504 Student Accommodation Plans.
6. The district uses content objectives that are based on the Massachusetts
curriculum frameworks in English language arts, history and social science,
mathematics, and science and technology/engineering, taught by qualified staff
members. Language objectives are also based on the Massachusetts English
language arts standards, and those standards contained in the Massachusetts
English Language Proficiency Benchmarks and Outcomes.
Authority: Title VI; c. 71A, §7; 603 CMR 26.07 (8)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to findings under MOA 13, CTE 5, CTE 7, CTE 14 and ELE 5 regarding equal access for
students with limited English proficiency to career/vocational technical information and for the
parents/guardians and students to receive counseling and postsecondary information in a language
they can understand at the vocational school. Further, LEP students are not always provided with
sheltered English instruction in elective and nonacademic classes at the high school or at the
vocational school.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 103 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 12
Equal Access to Nonacademic and Extracurricular Programs
The district provides appropriate support, where necessary, to limited English
proficient students to ensure that they have equal access to the nonacademic
programs and extracurricular activities available to their English-speaking peers.
Authority: Title VI; 603 CMR 26.06 (2)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
There is a lack of evidence regarding how information is made available to limited English proficient
students at the middle and high school level, in a language that they can understand, to ensure equal
access to the nonacademic programs and extracurricular activities.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 13
Follow-up Support
1. The district monitors students who have exited an English learner education
program for two years and provides language support services to those
students, if needed.
2. To the extent possible, the district provides access to adult basic education in
English language and literacy skill instruction for LEP students who were
previously enrolled in a public secondary school in the Commonwealth
directly from a country other than the United States and who were unable to
achieve English language proficiency as determined by assessments.
Authority: Title VI; Chapter 218 of the Acts of 2002
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews and the student record review showed that there is no formal policy or procedures in place
system-wide to track and monitor the provision of follow-up services to FLEP students. Interviews
indicate that transition exit meetings are typically conducted when a limited English proficient student
is exiting from an ELE program, but recommendations for follow-up support services and which
personnel are responsible for the follow-up monitoring are not clearly documented.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 104 of 152
COMPONENT VI: FACULTY, STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION
The criteria in this component examine whether the district has licensed staff,
provides supervision of aides and tutors, and provides ongoing professional
development in the program areas listed below. Additionally, the component
examines whether the district implements an effective system of program
leadership and oversight which fosters high standards and performance
expectations for all students and staff consistent with the goals of applicable
federal and state requirements and Education Reform Act of 1993. Finally, this
component examines whether the district’s personnel procedures are nondiscriminatory and aimed at recruiting employees from all groups.
:


Special Education (Report Issues # SE 50-54)
Civil Rights Methods of Administration (Report Issues MOA 18A-21)


Title I (Report Issues # TI 30-31)
Career and Technical Education (Report Issue # CTE 17)

English Learner Education (Report Issues 14-15)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 105 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
SPECIAL EDUCATION
VI. FACULTY, STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION
Legal Standard
SE 50
Responsibilities of the School Principal and Administrator of Special Education
Principal:
1. Instructional support. The principal in each of the district’s schools promotes
instructional practices responsive to student needs and ensures that adequate
instructional support is available for students and teachers. Instructional support
includes remedial instruction for students, consultative services for teachers,
availability of reading instruction at the elementary level, appropriate services for
linguistic minority students, and other services consistent with effective
educational practices and the requirements of M.G.L. c. 71B, §2. The principal
consults with the Administrator of Special Education regarding accommodations
and interventions for students. Such efforts and their results are documented and
placed in the student record. Additionally, when an individual student is referred
for an evaluation to determine eligibility for special education, the principal
ensures that documentation on the use of instructional support services for the
student is provided as part of the evaluation information reviewed by the Team
when determining eligibility.
2. Curriculum Accommodation Plan. The principal implements a curriculum
accommodation plan developed by the district’s general education program to
ensure that all efforts have been made to meet the needs of diverse learners in the
general education program. The plan assists the regular classroom teacher in
analyzing and accommodating diverse learning styles of all children in the regular
classroom and in providing appropriate services and support within the regular
education program including, but not limited to, direct and systemic instruction in
reading and provision of services to address the needs of children whose behavior
may interfere with learning. The plan includes teacher training in (1) analyzing
and accommodating diverse learning styles of all students in order to achieve an
objective of inclusion in the regular classroom of students with diverse learning
styles; (2) methods of collaboration among teachers, paraprofessionals and
teacher assistants to accommodate such styles; and (3) training in the provision of
pre-referral services within regular education, teacher mentoring and collaboration
and parental involvement. (The plan may be part of a multi-year strategic plan.)
3. Coordination with special education. The principal with the assistance of the
Administrator of Special Education coordinates the delivery and supervision of
special education services within each school building.
4. Educational services in home or hospital. Upon receipt of a physician’s written
order verifying that any student enrolled in a public school or placed by the public
school in a private setting must remain at home or in a hospital on a day or
overnight basis, or any combination of both, for medical reasons and for a period
of not less than fourteen school days in any school year, the principal arranges for
provision of educational services in the home or hospital. Such services are
provided with sufficient frequency to allow the student to continue his or her
educational program, as long as such services do not interfere with the medical
needs of the student. The principal coordinates such services with the
Administrator for Special Education for eligible students. Such educational
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 106 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
SPECIAL EDUCATION
VI. FACULTY, STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION
Legal Standard
services are not be considered special education unless the student has been
determined eligible for such services, and the services include services on the
student’s IEP.
Administrator of Special Education:
5. The school district has an appointed person to be its Administrator of Special
Education. The Administrator supervises all special education for the school
district and ensures compliance with all federal and state special education laws.
As appropriate, and in accordance with the requirements of M.G.L. c.71B, §3A,
the Administrator may designate other school district personnel to carry out
some of the duties of the Administrator.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
28.03(3)
Chapter 71, Section 38Q and 38Q ½
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews, student record review and documentation review indicate that the district has implemented
a Teacher Assistance Team(TAT) process in each school building to provide instructional support
interventions to address the diverse needs of the student population. The TAT teams at the elementary
and the middle school have a consistent process and practices in place. However, at the elementary
level, students who are limited English proficient and having difficulties with language related
activities and class work in the general education classroom, are referred to the TAT Team process by
classroom teachers who are not aware of the second language acquisition issues that present
difficulties to a limited English proficient student and are not cognizant of the instructional strategies
and accommodations needed to support the student
At the secondary level, the high school’s practice is to conduct a TAT meeting, which typically results
in a direct referral for a special education evaluation. The vocational school does not have a TAT
process in place.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 51
Appropriate special education teacher certification/licensure
Individuals who design and/or provide direct special education services described in
IEPs, or who supervise the provision of special education services by other teachers
or paraprofessionals, are appropriately certified.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
28.02(3)
34 CFR 300.23; 300.136
603 CMR 7.00
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required: No
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 107 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 52
Appropriate certifications/licenses or other credentials -- related service
providers
Any person, including non-educational personnel, who provides related services
described under federal special education law, who supervises paraprofessionals in
the provision of related services, or who provides support services directly to the
regular or special classroom teacher is appropriately certified, licensed,
board-registered or otherwise approved to provide such services by the relevant
professional standards board or agency for the profession.
State Regulations
28.02(3)
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.23; 300.24; 300.136
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 53
Use of paraprofessionals
1.
Paraprofessionals and assistants (e.g., teacher aides, tutors and student
teachers) are appropriately trained to assist in providing special education or
related services.
2.
Persons employed as paraprofessionals and assistants do not design
instruction for students with disabilities but are expected to implement
instruction under the supervision of an appropriately certified or licensed
professional who is proximate and readily available to provide such
supervision.
State Regulations
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.136(f)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews indicate that paraprofessional staff are not always trained to assist in the delivery of
services or instruction in the specific area(s) of the students’ educational and/or therapeutic need(s).
At the high school and vocational school, the aides, often deliver the instruction with minimal or no
supervision from a certified special education teacher. In addition, interviews indicate that
paraprofessional staff, who are placed out in the workplace with students at job sites or assisting in
the provision of ABA services in the home at the early childhood level, are not always sufficiently
trained or provided with regular supervision.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 108 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 54
Professional development regarding special education
The district considers the needs of all staff in developing training opportunities for
professional and paraprofessional staff and provides a variety of offerings which at a
minimum include the following training topics offered on an annual basis:
1. state and federal special education requirements and related local special
education policies and procedures;
2. confidentiality of student records;
3. training in analyzing and accommodating diverse learning styles of all
students in order to achieve an objective of inclusion in the regular
classroom of students with diverse learning styles;
4. methods of collaboration among teachers, paraprofessionals and teacher
assistants to accommodate diverse learning needs of all students in the
regular classroom;
5. training in the provision of pre-referral services within regular education,
teacher mentoring and collaboration and parental involvement;
6. training for all locally hired and contracted transportation providers on the
unique needs of all students being transported in regular and special
transportation vehicles; and
7. in cooperation with the special education parent advisory council, at least
one workshop annually within the district on the rights of students and their
parents and guardians under the state and federal special education laws and
makes written materials explaining such rights available upon request.
State Regulations
Chapter 71, Section 38g
CMR 28.03(1)(a) and 28.06(8)(c)
Chapter 71, Section 38Q and 38Q ½
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.382
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews indicate that there is a lack of professional development available for paraprofessional
staff system-wide.
Interviews indicate a need for teachers to gain greater understanding regarding the criteria for the
identification of disabilities as well as, instructional strategies, accommodations and modifications to
be implemented in the classroom for different types of disabilities, particularly students with
behavioral and social-emotional issues. In addition, documentation and interviews indicate that there
needs to be more widespread training in the following areas: assistive technology and applications for
different disabilities; cross-collaboration across the curriculum by the special education, regular
education and English Language Learner teaching staff in the areas of second language acquisition
and understanding of different cultures.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 109 of 152
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION
VI. FACULTY, STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 18A
School district employment practices
District employment practices in general are free from discrimination on the basis of
race, color, national origin, sex, or disability. In particular, the district’s faculty
salary scales are based on the conditions and responsibilities of employment without
regard to race, color, national origin, sex, or disability, and the district’s employee
recruitment is aimed at reaching all groups, including members of linguistic, ethnic,
and racial minorities, females and males, and persons with disabilities.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(c); EEOA: 20 U.S.C. 1703(d); Title IX: 20
U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.51-106.61; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.11104.14; Title II: 42 U.S.C. 12132; 28 CFR 35.140; Mass. Const. amend. art 114
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
Documentation and interviews indicate that the district has done limited outreach to recruit teaching
staff that reflect the changing population of the student community.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 19
Reserved
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 20
Reserved
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 21
Staff training regarding civil rights responsibilities
The district provides in-service training for all school personnel at least annually
regarding civil rights responsibilities, including the prevention of discrimination and
harassment on the basis of students’ race, color, sex, religion, national origin and
sexual orientation and the appropriate methods for responding to it in the school
setting.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3; EEOA: 20 U.S.C. 1703(f); Title IX: 20
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 110 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.31-106.42; M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.00, esp.
26.07(2), (3)
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
District Response Required:
No
TITLE 1
VI. FACULTY, STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION
Legal Standard
TI 30
1. All professional staff providing Title I services are appropriately licensed (or
hold current licensure waivers) and are highly qualified for their job title and
function.
2. Where applicable, the district’s Title IIA grant application describes how it will
use these funds to meet the requirements of section 1119.
3. Each principal of a school that has a Title I program (whether a Schoolwide or a
Targeted Assistance program) has attested in writing that the teachers within the
school (Title I and non-Title I) who teach the core academic subjects have met or
are working toward meeting the highly qualified teacher requirements.
MGL Chapter 71, 38G
1119(a), (c), (d), and (f) NCLB
2122(b) 10 NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 31
Professional Development
1.
The school district uses at least 5% of its Title I funds for professional
development activities to ensure that teachers who are not highly qualified,
become highly qualified.
2.
Title I teachers are involved in the Title IIA professional development needs
assessment.
1119(k)(1) NCLB
2122(c)(1)(2) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 111 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
VI. FACULTY, STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION
Legal Standard
CTE 17
All staff in Perkins-eligible programs (including Chapter 74-approved programs) are
appropriately licensed as required by Chapter 74 Section 18 603 CMR 4.03 (5); 4.07
and Chapter 71 Section 38G 603 CMR 7.00? Perkins Section 135; Chapter 74
Section 18 603 CMR 4.03(5); 4.07, M.G.L. c.71Section 38G, M.G.L. c. 71, Section
59B, No Child Left Behind
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Based on the information submitted by the district, not all staff are listed in the Vocational Technical
Education Staff Register (VTESR). Further, staff in the Non-Chapter 74 approved Construction
Technology program are currently teaching without Massachusetts educator licensure.
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
VI. FACULTY, STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION
Legal Standard
ELE 14
Licensure and Fluency Requirements
1. The district assures that all teachers in English language classrooms are
literate and fluent in English.
A teacher is literate in English if the teacher:
(a) possesses a teaching license issued pursuant to G.L. c.71, section 38G;
or
(b) possesses a vocational teacher approval or a vocational technical
educator license; or
(c) earns a passing score on the Communication and Literacy Skills
portion of the Massachusetts Tests for Educator Licensure (MTEL); or
(d) possesses a Bachelor’s degree from a college or university where the
language of instruction was English.
English fluency may be determined through one or more of the following
methods:
(a) classroom observation and assessment by the teacher’s supervisor,
principal, and/or superintendent or charter school leader; or
(b) an interview and assessment by the teacher’s supervisor, principal,
and/or superintendent or charter school leader; or
(c) the teacher’s demonstration of fluency in English, through a test
accepted by the Commissioner of Education; or
(d) another method determined by the superintendent or charter school
leader, and accepted by the Commissioner of Education.
2. Teachers and educational staff who are qualified and who teach in ELE
programs hold the appropriate licenses or current waivers issued by the
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 112 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
VI. FACULTY, STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION
Legal Standard
Department of Education.
3. If the district has 200 or more LEP students and has a director of programs
for LEP students who is employed in that position for one-half time or more,
that director is certified in English as a Second Language, or Bilingual
Education, or English Language Learners program license, and an
administrator/supervisor license.
4. Although districts are required no later than July 2008 to have at least one
teacher who is certified in ESL, or TBE, or ELL under Chapter 71A, under
federal Title VI, districts are required to have certified and qualified staff.
Authority: G.L. c. 71, § 38G; G.L. c. 71A, § 2; Chapter 218 of the Acts of
2002, §§ 24 and 25; Title VI; 603 CMR 14.05
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
ELE 15
Professional Development Requirements
District schools with LEP students implement a professional development plan that
provides high quality training in second language acquisition and in working with
culturally and linguistically diverse student populations. The school provides
opportunities that ensure the progress of LEP students in developing oral
comprehension, speaking, reading, and writing of English, and also in meeting
academic standards and curriculum frameworks.
Authority: M.G.L. c71, § 59C; NCLB, Title III
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews and the student record review indicate the need to provide professional development to the
district staff across the curriculum in second language acquisition and the types of instructional
strategies, modifications and accommodations to use when working with the culturally and
linguistically diverse student population in each school building (Refer to SE 54).
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 113 of 152
COMPONENT VII: SCHOOL FACILITIES
The criteria in this component examine whether the district maintains facilities that are
conducive to learning, facilitate integration, and provide equal access and opportunity for
students to achieve in the program areas listed below:


Special Education (Report Issues # SE 55)
Civil Rights Methods of Administration (Report Issues MOA 22-23)

Career and Technical Education (Report Issue # CTE 18)

English Learner Education (Report Issue # ELE 16)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 114 of 152
SPECIAL EDUCATION
VII. SCHOOL FACILITIES
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 55
Special education facilities and classrooms
1.
The school district provides facilities and classrooms for eligible students
which maximize the inclusion of such students into the life of the school;
2.
Provide accessibility in order to implement fully each child’s IEP;
3.
Are at least equal in all physical respects to the average standards of general
education facilities and classrooms; and
4.
Are given the same priority as general education programs for access to and
use of instructional and other space in public schools in order to minimize
the separation or stigmatization of eligible students.
State Regulations
28.03(1)(b)
Federal Requirements
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews, documentation and facility checks indicate that the space in the special education resource
rooms at the middle and high school are adequate size for no more than 8-9 students. However, the
student enrollment typically increases and can reach up to 12-15 students. The resource rooms at the
middle school are windowless and have limited technological access(LCD) and limited storage space.
At the high school, Rooms 117 and 122 are divided in half, poorly ventilated and used as special
education spaces.
At the McGlynn Elementary School, the life skills program for grades 2-5 is placed near the K-1
classrooms, and the middle school life skills program is placed in the elementary school, rather than
in the middle school.
CRITERION
NUMBER
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION
VII. SCHOOL FACILITIES
Legal Standard
MOA 22
Accessibility of district programs and services for students with disabilities
In at least one facility within the district, the district makes available and entirely
accessible to students with disabilities all educational and vocational programs and
services offered at each level (preschool, elementary and secondary).
Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.21,104.22; Title II: 42 U.S.C. 12132; 28
CFR 35.149, 35.150; Mass. Const. amend. art. 114
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 115 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 23
Comparability of facilities
Where the district provides separate facilities for members of a specific group, those
facilities are comparable to those offered other students in the district, including:
1. separate facilities for disabled, limited-English-proficient or pregnant students
that are comparable to the facilities for other students in the district;
2. separate toilet, locker room, and shower facilities for students of one gender that
are comparable in size, condition, number and location to those provided
students of the other gender.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(b)(2); Title IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34
CFR 106.33, 106.40(b)(3); Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.34(c);
Mass. Const. amend. art. 114; 603 CMR 28.03(1)(b)
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Refer to CTE 18, SE 55 and ELE 16 regarding comparability of facilities.
CRITERION
NUMBER
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
VII. SCHOOL FACILITIES
Legal Standard
CTE 18
Instructional facilities, equipment and supplies meet the current occupational
standards as well as standards for a healthy, safe environment. Perkins Section 135;
Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (3) (4) (7)(8)
Rating: Not Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
During the review, a safety expert contracted by the Department carried out a safety inspection of
Medford Vocational High School’s shops and related facilities. The safety expert identified 68 serious
safety hazards that will require immediate corrective action. Serious hazards are defined as those that
can cause an accident or health hazard exposure resulting in death or serious harm. Of the 68, the
expert identified items 1, 2, 3, 14, 21, 27, 29, 30, 31 and 32 to be approaching imminent danger to
students and staff. On Safety training is not provided to all staff and there is no school-wide Safety
Plan. None of the 12 shops inspected were in full compliance with applicable Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) regulations.
Jeffrey Wheeler, State Director of Career/Vocational Technical Education sent the report prepared by
the safety expert to Superintendent Belson and Principal Mahoney on July 5, 2005. The district must
begin rectifying the hazards immediately. All safety hazards must be corrected prior to the opening of
the 2005-2006 school year
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 116 of 152

There were several health violations, particularly in Culinary Arts, which was operating with
an expired Food Establishment Permit. Further, the kitchen facilities were filthy, including
staff and servers in dirty uniforms and many students did not have gloves on while preparing
food. One student was witnessed eating off a serving utensil while preparing a meal and
putting that same utensil back into the pot.

Based on observation, despite the fact that the Medford Early Education Program (MEEP)
has at least two children in wheelchairs, the handicap ramp accessibility at the main entrance
was inadequate.

Not all programs have up-to-date equipment to enable students to meet the requirements of
the Certificate of Occupational Proficiency standards. Although the Machine Technology
related instruction room is equipped with several computers, they are not updated and rarely
used to assist in related instruction.

On one occasion students were observed smoking at the MVTHS main entrance in the
presence of a supervising staff member.

The girls’ restroom and adjoining hallway had a heavy odor of smoke despite the presence of
two staff on hall duty. During lunch periods, students eat, drink, and socialize in the halls and
on stairways, obstructing passage, compromising sanitation and presenting potential safety
hazards.

Students at MVTHS have less access to the Health and Fitness course offered to the students
at MHS through MHS.
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
VII. SCHOOL FACILITIES
Legal Standard
ELE 16
The district ensures that LEP students are provided facilities, materials and services
comparable to those provided to the overall student population.
Authority: Title VI; 603 CMR 26.07
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews indicate that there is a shortage of materials and books available for students and teachers
in English language support programs.
One of the spaces designated for the ELL program at the Andrews Middle School is small. In addition,
students are assigned to one classroom space for the entire day. There is an initiative to review the
schedule at the middle school level to afford more time for the integration of the LEP students into the
exploratory classes with their regular education peers.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 117 of 152
COMPONENT VIII: PROGRAM PLAN AND EVALUATION
The criteria in this component examine whether the district has written program plans that are
evaluated according to specific regulatory requirements and whether parents have
opportunities for input on needs, program implementation, evaluation, and improvement in the
program areas listed below:


Special Education (Report Issue # SE 56)
Civil Rights Methods of Administration (Report Issues MOA 23A-25)



Title I (Report Issues # TI 32-38)
Safe and Drug Free Schools (Report Issue # SDF 5-8)
Career and Technical Education (Report Issue # CTE 19)

English Learner Education (Report Issue #17)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 118 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
SPECIAL EDUCATION
VIII. PROGRAM PLAN AND EVALUATION
Legal Standard
SE 56
Special education programs and services are evaluated
1.
Special education programs, services and administrative areas are regularly
evaluated.
2.
The district develops methods for determining the effectiveness of programs
in assisting students with disabilities to achieve the goals set forth in their
IEPs in the least restrictive environment.
3.
The district uses information it gathers from annual IEP reviews to measure
the effectiveness of special education programs, and identifies programs,
services and administrative areas that need improvement or must be
developed.
4.
As part of these evaluation procedures, the district measures the success of
programs based on students’ local and statewide assessment results, drop out
rates and graduation rates for special education students.
State Regulations
Chapter 71B, Section 2
Chapter 71, Section 59C
Rating: Partially Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.137
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Documentation and interviews indicate that there is no formal regular evaluation of the special
education programs and services on a continuous basis. The review of documentation showed an
evaluation of the Learning Group Program in 2004. Interviews indicate that there are meetings,
informal discussions and changes made to programs and services, but not on the basis of results
emerging from a formal evaluation and/or self-assessment process.
CRITERION
NUMBER
CIVIL RIGHTS METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION
VIII. PROGRAM PLAN AND EVALUATION
Legal Standard
MOA 23A
Review and revision of policies to remove barriers to the enrollment and
retention of homeless children and youth
The school district has adopted policies to remove barriers to the enrollment and
retention of homeless children and youth in district schools; it regularly reviews and
revises those policies.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(1)(I), 722(g)(7)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
No
Page 119 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 24
Curriculum review
The district ensures that teachers in the district review all educational materials for
simplistic and demeaning generalizations, lacking intellectual merit, on the basis of
race, color, sex, religion, national origin and sexual orientation. Appropriate
activities, discussions and/or supplementary materials are used to provide balance
and context for any such stereotypes depicted in such materials.
M.G.L. c. 76, s. 5; 603 CMR 26.05(2)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 25
Institutional self-evaluation
The district evaluates all aspects of its K-12 program annually to ensure that all
students, regardless of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, limited English
proficiency, sexual orientation, disability, or housing status, have equal access to all
programs, including athletics and other extracurricular activities. It makes such
changes as are indicated by the evaluation.
Title VI: 42 U.S.C. 2000d; 34 CFR 100.3(b)(2); EEOA: 20 U.S.C. 1703(f); Section
504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR 104.4(b)(4); Title II: 42 U.S.C. 12132; 28 CFR
35.130(b)(3); NCLB: Title III, Part A, Sec. 3121(c)(1)(C); Title X, Part C, Sec.
722(g)(1)(J)(i), 722(g)(7); Mass. Const. amend. art. 114; M.G.L. c. 71A, s. 7; c. 76,
s. 5; 603 CMR 26.07(1),(4)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
The district, through the work of the Medford Human Rights Commission and Racially Balanced
Advisory Committee, regularly track multicultural and multiracial efforts as evidenced in the K-12
curriculum. However, the documentation and data review, the student record reviews and interviews
indicate that there are inconsistencies and inequities in the implementation of the equal access
requirements that need to be addressed as referenced in MOA 3, MOA 4, ELE 5 and CTE 14.
In addition, the Medford Human Rights Commission and Racially Balanced Advisory Committee
committees need to develop a formal mechanism to evaluate all aspects of the K-12 program as
delineated in the above criterion.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 120 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
MOA 26
Records for homeless students
The school maintains for each homeless student records ordinarily kept by it,
including immunization or medical records, academic records, birth certificates,
guardianship records, and evaluations for special services or programs, so that the
records are available, in a timely fashion, when the student enters a new school or
school district.
NCLB: Title X, Part C, Sec. 722(g)(3)(D)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
CRITERION
NUMBER
No
TITLE 1
VIII. PROGRAM PLAN AND EVALUATION
Legal Standard
TI 32
A needs assessment and a data analysis are conducted annually in each Title I school
(Targeted Assistance and Schoolwide programs) to determine the types of programs
and services to be provided to Title I students, parents, and staff. The implemented
program is evaluated for effectiveness annually and the resulting program changes
are described. Meeting notes, summary of analysis of needs assessment data, written
evaluation findings, and all relevant documents are available.
1114(b)(1)(A); 1115 (c)(2)(B) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 33
The adequate yearly progress (AYP) of each Title I school is evaluated in the
aggregate and by subgroup, as available, on an annual basis. Title I program
changes are implemented that reflect the results of this evaluation.
1114 (b)(2)(B)(iii); 1115 (c)(2)(B); 1116(A)(1)(A) and (B) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
No
Page 121 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 34
Each Title I school identified as “in need of improvement” revises (not later than 3
months after being identified) a two-year school improvement plan in consultation
with parents, staff, other district personnel, and outside experts that meets NCLB
requirements.
1116(b)(3)(A) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
The Title I Schools are not identified as “in need of improvement”.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 35
For schools that have been identified as “in need of improvement,” school
improvement plans must be implemented not later than the beginning of next full
school year following this identification.
1116(b)(3)(D)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
The Title I Schools are not identified as “in need of improvement”.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 36
For any of the district’s Title I schools that have been identified as “in need of
improvement,” the school spends at least 10% of its allocation of Title I funds to
provide teachers and the school principal with high-quality professional development
that directly addresses the problems associated with academic achievement in the
school.
1116(b)(3)(A)(iii)(I) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
The Title I Schools are not identified as “in need of improvement”.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 122 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 37
For schools that have been identified as “in need of improvement,” the district
provides students enrolled in those schools the choice to transfer to another of the
district’s schools not identified as in need of improvement and informs parents of
this opportunity. Priority is given to the lowest achieving students from low-income
families.
1116(b)(1)(E)(i) and (ii) NCLB
2763A-32 of P.L. 106-554 (Education Appropriations Act, 2001)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
The Title I Schools are not identified as “in need of improvement”.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 38
For schools that continue to fail to make AYP after being identified as “in need of
improvement,” the district:
1. Continues to make the choice to transfer option available to students;
2. Makes supplemental educational services available;
For supplemental services, the district/school notifies parents of eligible students
at least annually about the availability of supplemental educational services,
objectively determines which students should receive services if all students can
not be served, arranges for service to be provided, ensures that students with
disabilities and students with limited English proficiency are served
appropriately and when requested, assists the Department with monitoring the
services provided;
3. The district addresses requirements for schools in Corrective Action (if
applicable), and;
4. The district provides technical assistance to schools in improvement and/or
corrective action status.
1116(b)(5) and 1116 (e) NCLB; 200.46 (4) and (5)
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
The Title I Schools are not identified as “in need of improvement”.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 123 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
SAFE AND DRUG FREE SCHOOLS
VIII. PROGRAM PLAN AND EVALUATION
Legal Standard
SDF 5
Each recipient bases its programs on a thorough assessment of objective data about
the drug and violence problems in the schools and communities served. Each
SDFSCA grant recipient conducts a through assessment of the nature and extent of
youth drug use and violence problems.
[Title IV Secs. 4111 – 4116]
Rating: Commendable
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
Based on documentation and interviews, Medford Public Schools has an exemplary process in place
to determine the current level of substance abuse and violence among the student population in the
community. In addition to administering the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, this year the district
administered Communities that Care survey to give a clearer indication of the extent of youth drug
use and alcohol.
In addition the process included parent surveys and focus groups, teacher surveys, community focus
groups, and meetings with parents, community leaders, teachers, advisory councils, students and task
force members. Furthermore, Safe and Drug Free School reporting forms, Medford’s Police Crime
Reports, disciplinary records at all levels and nurse’s logs are reviewed and analyzed. Interviews,
meetings and data collection are also conducted regarding incidents/usage by youth from local law
enforcement agencies, hospitals, health agencies and community agencies.
There is documentation to support the statistics and incident information reported in the objective
analysis of the district’s 2005 SDFSCA grant application. There is evidence that the objective
analysis was based upon ongoing local assessment of activities and programs.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SDF 6
Each recipient establishes a set of performance measures and designs its programs to
meet those measures.
[Title IV Sections 4114, (d) (B) (i) (I) (II) (ii) (C)]
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 124 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SDF 7
Each recipient designs and implements its programs for youth based on research or
evaluation that provides evidence that programs used are based on scientifically
based research that provides evidence that the program to be used will reduce
violence and illegal drug use.
[NCLB, Title IV Section 4115, (a) (C)]
Rating: Commendable
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
Based on documentation, interviews and classroom observation, selected programs and activities
respond to identified needs. These programs and activities are crafted on scientifically based
research and evaluation that demonstrate evidence of program effectiveness in reducing and
preventing drug use, violence and disruptive behavior among youth.
Components being implemented include: Second Step, Bullying Program, Peer Mediation, Smoking
Cessation, Gay Straight Alliance, SADD, Teen Health Teaching Modules, 2nd Hand Smoke Program
Project Safeguard, STARS and Talking About Touching. All students participate in all activities and
programs are adjusted when needed for students with special needs. The district has very clear
expectations against violence and illegal use of drugs with appropriate, clear, consistent and wellenforced consequences in place for violation of policies.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SDF 8
Each recipient shall conduct a periodic evaluation to assess its progress toward
reducing violence and illegal drug use in schools to be served based on performance
measures.
[NCLB, Title IV Secs. 4115 (2) (A),(B)]
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
District Response Required:
No
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
VIII. PROGRAM PLAN AND EVALUATION
Legal Standard
CTE 19
The school has developed and implemented a system of program evaluation that
includes, at a minimum, the following four core indicators and program outcomes.
Perkins Section 113; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.05)
Perkins Act Core Indicators:
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 125 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
VIII. PROGRAM PLAN AND EVALUATION
Legal Standard
(1) Student attainment of challenging State established academic and technical skill
proficiencies;
(2) Student attainment of a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent, a
proficiency credential in conjunction with a secondary school diploma, or a post
secondary degree or credential;
(3) Placement in, retention in, and completion of postsecondary education or
advanced training, placement in military service, or placement or retention in
employment; and
(4) Student participation in and completion of career and technical education
programs that lead to nontraditional training and employment.
Chapter 74 Outcomes:
1. Outcome I - Effective with the Class of 2003, the percentage of vocational
technical education students who receive a high school diploma.
2. Outcome II - Upon the development of the Certificate of Occupational
Proficiency Assessment System, the percentage of vocational technical
education students who receive a Certificate of Occupational Proficiency.
Outcome III - The percentage of vocational technical education program
graduates who are in a military program related to their program of study,
employed related to their program of study or who are enrolled in postsecondary
education or advanced training twelve months after graduation.
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
Student records were incomplete. While placement data is used to evaluate program success, there is
no additional system of evaluation or evidence that Perkins Core Indicators or Chapter 74 Outcomes
are used for evaluation, modification and improvement of programs.
The data and financial review that was conducted by K.P. Marshall Associates PC CPAs found
several problematic areas. Please refer to the draft financial and data review report that was sent to
Superintendent Belson by Jeffrey Wheeler, State Director of Career/Vocational Technical Education
on July 12, 2005
Most Recent Perkins/Chapter 74 Data:
Perkins: Medford did not meet state goals in the following areas:
Core Indicator I - Academic Achievement (MCAS results) – 0 % of (0 /1) students with limited
English proficiency passed the MCAS.
Core Indicator II - Attainment of a Secondary Diploma – 85% of all students and 80% of
economically disadvantaged students at the vocational school received a high school diploma(the
goal for all student populations is 91.23%).
Core Indicator III – Perkins Positive Placement – Overall, the state placement goal of 95.58% was
met for all CTE students (97.46%) and overall, the positive placement for students with disabilities
(based on a two-year average) is 100%. However, the following CTE programs did not meet the state
Perkins placement goal of 95.58%: Electrician (92.31%), Automotive Body Repairer (93.75%) and
Graphic & Printing Equipment Operator (90.00%).
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 126 of 152
Core Indicator IV A - Nontraditional by Gender Enrollment – Medford reported an average of
7.91% nontraditional enrollment rate (8.87% for Tech Prep students). The state goal of 9.43% was
not met.
Core Indicator IV B – Nontraditional by Gender Completion – Medford reported a 6.0 % completion
rate for students enrolled in programs non-traditional for their gender (7.41% for Tech Prep
students), while the state goal is 8.10%.
Chapter 74: The school district’s overall placement rate for the class of 2003 was 85.59% exceeding
the Chapter 74 performance goal (70%.) However, the following career/vocational technical
education programs did not meet the 70% standard: Child Care (66.67, or 2/3 students), Graphic &
Printing Equipment Operator (60.00%, or 6/9 students) and Cabinetmaker & Mill worker (57.14%)
and Childcare and Guidance Worker (33.33%, or 1/3 students).
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
VIII. PROGRAM PLAN AND EVALUATION
Legal Standard
ELE 17
DOE Data Submission Requirements and Program Evaluation
1. The district reports annually to the Department, the following student
information:
i.the schools in which LEP students are enrolled;
ii.the grade levels of the students;
iii.the primary languages of each LEP student; and
iv.the types of English learner programs in which the district has
enrolled LEP students, including sheltered English immersion, twoway bilingual, transitional bilingual education (for students with
waivers only), or students whose parents have declined services.
2. The district conducts periodic evaluations of the effectiveness of its ELE
program. The students are showing English language development and
the ability to participate meaningfully in the educational program. Where
the district documents that the program is not effective, it takes steps to
make appropriate program adjustments or changes that are responsive to
the outcomes of the program evaluation.
For Title III districts:
3. The district provides information to the Department that describes:
(a) ELE programs and activities;
(b) a description of the progress made by students in learning English
and academic content;
(c) the number and percentage of students in the programs attaining
English proficiency by the end of the school year; and
(d) the description of academic progress made by the students.
Authority: M.G.L. c 71A; NCLB, Title III, Title VI; 603 CMR 14.03
District Response Required: Yes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department of Education Findings:
Interviews and documentation indicate that the district does not have a process in place to conduct
periodic evaluations of the effectiveness of its ELE program as required.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 127 of 152
COMPONENT IX: RECORD KEEPING
The criteria in this component examine whether the district maintains required records and
documentation for each program area, whether entitlement grants are appropriately
designed, amended, and locally monitored, whether the use federal grant funds is in
accordance with statutory fund-use rules, including supplement not supplant provisions and
maintenance of effort requirements where applicable for the program areas listed below:


Title I (Report Issues # TI 39-40 General Requirements and
TI 1-18 Fiscal Requirements)


Special Education (Report Issues # SE 57-58)
Safe and Drug Free Schools (Report Issue # SDF 9-10)
Career and Technical Education (Report Issue # CTE 20-23)

English Learner Education (Report Issue # 18)
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 128 of 152
SPECIAL EDUCATION
IX. RECORD KEEPING
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 57
Special education child count
1.
The school district maintains appropriate procedures to ensure that an
accurate and unduplicated child count is provided to the Department of
Education upon request. A child count represents students with current,
accepted IEPs who are provided, at a minimum, direct special education
and/or related services by the district or by an out-of-district provider through
a contract with the district.
2.
The child count also includes students with disabilities determined eligible
for special education who are attending private schools at private expense
and are receiving publicly funded services according to IEPs developed by
the district.
3.
The district does not include as part of its special education child count
(a) students who are determined by the Department to be erroneously
classified as eligible to be counted under federal or state special education
requirements; (b) students who are no longer receiving special education
and/or related services; and (c) students with disabilities for whom the
district has no programmatic responsibility, even if the district has financial
responsibility.
State Regulations
603 CMR 23.00
Rating: Implemented
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.750-754; 300.145; 300.560-300.577
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act
(FERPA); 34 CFR 300.133
District Response Required: No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SE 58
Federal Special Education Entitlement Grant
1. The district’s Special Education entitlement grant is designed by appropriate
local administrators who are responsible for the implementation of the local
special education programs and services.
2. Where necessary, appropriate local administrators amend the programmatic and
budgetary sections of the grant according to procedures and timelines required
by the Department of Education.
3. Appropriate local administrators monitor the entitlement grant in an ongoing
manner to ensure its full implementation as the Department of Education has
approved it.
4. The district has secured the approval of the Department of Education for all
amendments prior to their implementation.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 129 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
State Regulations
28.03(1)(e)
Federal Requirements
34 CFR 300.230; 300.340-300.500
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
District Response Required:
No
TITLE 1
IX. RECORD KEEPING – General Requirements
Legal Standard
TI 39
1. The district has submitted all required reports to the Department including the
district Title I Plan/Application and Performance and Achievement Report.
2. The district maintains appropriate Title I records in a central location or at each
Title I school and keeps correspondence on file, including documentation for
identifying schools eligible for Title I services (Target Area Selection) determining
school allocations.
3. Current information is made available to the Department regarding the allocation
of Title I funds to schools and the rank order list and student selection criteria
determined by the district.
1113; 1116 (c)(1)(B) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 40
Federal Title I Grant:
1. The district’s Title I grant is developed by appropriate local administrators
who are responsible for the implementation of the local Title I programs and
services.
2. Where necessary, appropriate local administrators amend the programmatic
and budgetary sections of the grant according to procedures and timelines
required by the Department, including those for grant amendments,
3. Appropriate local administrators monitor the grant in an ongoing manner to
ensure its full implementation as the Department has approved it.
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 130 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
TITLE 1
IX. RECORD KEEPING – FISCAL REQUIREMENTS
I. Maintenance of Effort
Legal Standard
TI 1
The maintenance of effort fiscal test is of local and state expenditures, not of Title I
or other federal expenditures.
1120A(a); 9521 NCLB
District Response Required: No
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 2
The school district’s combined fiscal effort per student (or aggregate expenditures of
the school district and state for free public education for the preceding fiscal year)
was not less than 90% of the combined fiscal effort or aggregate expenditures for the
second preceding fiscal year.
1120A(a); 9521(a) NCLB
District Response Required: No
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
II. Comparability
Legal Standard
TI 3
1. Documentation of the district’s Comparability Report demonstrates annual
compliance with the comparability requirement and is documented at least
biennially.
1120A(c)(3)(B) NCLB
2. The district’s comparability fiscal test is a comparison of local and state funds in
Title I schools and non-Title I schools, not a comparison of federal funds.
1120A(c) NCLB
3. The school district uses state and local funds in Title I schools that provide
services that, taken as a whole, are at least comparable to services in non-Title I
schools.
1120A(c)(1)(A) NCLB
4. If all of the district’s schools are Title I schools, the school district uses state and
local funds to provide services that, taken as a whole, are substantially comparable in
each school.
1120A(c)(1)(B) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 131 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 4
1. The district has established and implemented the following requirements:
a. a district-wide salary schedule;
b. a policy to ensure equivalence among schools in teachers, administrators,
and other staff; and
c. a policy to ensure equivalence among schools in the provision of
curriculum materials and instructional supplies.
1120A(c)(2)(A) NCLB
2. If the school district groups schools by grade-span for demonstrating comparability, the
school district does so in a way that reflects the actual grade-spans of the school district.
1120A(c)(1)(C) NCLB; Title I Policy Guidance IASA
3. In applicable situations, the school district divides a grade-span with significant school
enrollment differences into a large-group/small-group model.
Title I Policy Guidance IASA
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 5
1. Other measures, such as student/instructional staff ratios or student/instructional staff
salary ratios, are used to demonstrate comparability.
a. Student/staff ratios: The Title I school average, as determined in
Comparability Report forms, does not exceed 110% of average of non-Title I
schools.
b. Student/staff salary ratios: The Title I school averages are at least 90% of the
average of non-Title I schools.
c. Staff salary differentials for years of employment are not used in implementing
requirements under criterion TI 5 (b) above.
1120A(c)(2)(B); 1120A(c)(3)(A) NCLB; Title I Policy Guidance IASA
2. Non-instructional staff (e.g., cafeteria workers, custodians, nurses, playground
aides, student teachers, volunteers, etc.) are not included in the district’s
comparability determinations.
Title I Policy Guidance IASA
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 132 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 6
If the district is receiving and excluding supplemental state and local funds from the
Title I comparability determinations, the district is able to demonstrate that the
supplemental state and/or local funds that are excluded from Title I comparability
determinations are used for programs that meet the intent and purposes of Title I.
1120A(d) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
III. Supplement, Not Supplant
Legal Standard
TI 7
[Applicable
to Targeted
Assistance
Schools
(TAS)]
The district is able to demonstrate that it uses Title I funds only to supplement and,
to the extent practical, increase the level of funds that would in the absence of Title I
funds be made available from non-federal sources for the education of students
participating in Title I programs.
1120A(b)(1) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 8
[Applicable
to TAS]
The district/school is able to demonstrate that the Title I funds have been used for the
express purpose of serving those students who were identified as being in greatest
need of Title I assistance based on the district’s and school’s Title I student selection
criteria.
1115(a) NCLB
District Response Required: No
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 9
[Applicable
to Schoolwide
Title I funds may be used in combination with state, local, and other federal funds to serve
the entire school population in accordance with the schoolwide plan in effect for the school.
1114(a)(1) NCLB
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 133 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
Programs
(SWP)]
The district is able to demonstrate that the Title I funds in a schoolwide program
school are in addition to the total amount of funds that would, in the absence of the
Title I funds, be made available from non-federal sources for the school, including
funds needed to provide services required by law for students with disabilities and
students with limited English proficiency.
1114(a)(2)(B) NCLB
District Response Required:
Rating: Not Applicable
No
Department of Education Findings:
Medford Public Schools does not have any School-wide Program in the Title I Eligible schools
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 10
(Exclusion)
If the district is excluding supplemental state and local funds from the Title I
supplement (not supplant determinations), the district is able to demonstrate that the
excluded funds are used for programs that meet the intent and purposes of Title I.
1120A 1120A(d)
Rating: Not Applicable
District Response Required:
No
Department of Education Findings:
The district is not excluding state and local funds from the Title I supplement.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 11
In implementing federal Title I supplement, not supplant requirements, the district
has developed and implemented a Supplement Not Supplant policy and procedures.
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 134 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
IV. Other Fiscal Requirements
Legal Standard
TI 12
The district maintains time and effort records for all Title I staff to document the time
actually spent by staff on Title I activities.
a. Full-time staff – Staff funded solely from the Title I grant sign semi-annual
certifications that he/she has been working solely in activities supported by the
Title I grant for the period indicated. The certification is signed by the employee
or supervisory official having first-hand knowledge of the work performed by the
employee.
b. Split time staff – Title I personnel whose time is charged in part to Title I and in
part to other revenue sources (district funds or other federal funds) maintain
monthly time and effort records. The employee documents the portions of time
and effort dedicated to Title I and other revenue sources and must account for the
total time for which the employee is compensated. The time and effort record
coincides with one or more pay periods and must be signed by the employee and
countersigned by an administrator or supervisor.
EDGAR: OMB Circular A-87; MADOE Title I Instructions
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 13
The district has selected eligible schools in accordance with Title I requirements
under this criterion.
1113(a); 1113(b); 1113(c); NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 14
The district includes accurate data in its Title I Application (Form 1) for the number
of students residing in each of the district’s school attendance areas.
1113(a) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 135 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 15
The district has made appropriate reservations (set asides) on Form 2 in accordance
with applicable NCLB requirements:
1. Professional development – highly qualified staff
2. Professional development – schools in need of improvement
3. Choice-related transportation and supplementary services
4. Parental involvement
5. Homeless
1113(c)(2)(A); 1113(c)(3) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
District Response Required:
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 16
The final allocations to schools have been calculated in accordance with Title I
requirements, and the final allocation totals appropriately relate to the budget total.
1113(a); 1113(c)(2)(A) NCLB
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
No
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 17
The district has made private school allocations in accordance with Title I
requirements.
1120(a); 1120(b); 1120(c) NCLB
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 136 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
TI 18
Budgeting – The district budget process demonstrates appropriate Title I program
planning and implementation consistent with identified student needs at each school.
Note the following Department procedures in determining compliance under this
criterion:
Review the latest budget, budget narrative, budget comparison, and list of
Title I personnel documents to gain an understanding of the schools and
grades participating in Title I programs. Interview school staff to determine
which subjects and grades are Title I.
1. Does the current year budget total correspond with the district’s
entitlement together with any carryover? If not, obtain explanation.
2. Does the current year budget total correspond with the total funds
allocated on Form 1? If not, obtain explanation.
3. Review the allocation for each school. Do the allocated dollars for
each school approximate budget of personnel assigned to the
school as shown on the personnel list? During the school visit,
determine whether the personnel are assigned and teaching the
grades and subjects noted.
4. Sample schools to compare the consistency of the listing of
personnel to the personnel listed on Form D of the Comparability
Report. If not consistent, obtain explanation.
MADOE Title I Grant Application Instructions and Guidance
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
No
SAFE AND DRUG FREE SCHOOLS
IX. RECORD KEEPING
Legal Standard
SDF 9
Appropriate accounting and budget procedures are being implemented to insure that
program expenditures are related to the purpose and intent of the Safe and Drug Free
Schools and Communities Act.
[(EDGAR 76.730 to 734]
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 137 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
SDF 10
Each recipient provides a set of assurances that the activities or programs to be
funded comply with the Principles of Effectiveness and foster a safe and drug-free
learning environment that supports academic achievement.
[NCLB Title IV Sec. 4114 (d) (1) (6-9)
District Response Required:
Rating: Implemented
CRITERION
NUMBER
No
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
IX. RECORD KEEPING
Legal Standard
CTE 20
Student records contain the items listed in the Student Record Review Checklist.
Perkins Section 5; Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (4)©(d; 603 CMR 23.00.
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Although there was evidence of required documentation in select files, it was not consistent for all
records reviewed. Several student records contained misfiled information, such as letters and report
cards, of other students.
Exploratory evaluation results are not shared with parents/guardians nor are parents/guardians
required to sign off on final course selection or Tech Prep agreements (before counting students as
Tech Prep and allowing them to participate in Tech Prep activities). The 8th grade Stanford 9 was
referenced as a tool for placement purposes, but no student records contained a copy of this test or
evidence of use in planning.
While files contained a Career Plan/Portfolio, there was no evidence that it was used in planning any
part of the students’ vocational technical program or that it was shared with teachers or
parents/guardians as intended.
Some admission’s applications indicated first languages other than English; however, there was no
documentation of a Home Language Survey or assessment of student’s English language proficiency.
No materials (such as letters home) were translated.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 138 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 21
Perkins Local Plans. Local Plan Updates, CYE Reports, CTE –SIMS Records and
allocation grants are appropriately designed, amended and locally monitored and the
required records and documentation regarding all Perkins activities including plans,
reports and allocation, competitive and continuation grants are maintained. Perkins
Sections 13, 201
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Based upon interviews and record reviews, there is no formal process for the Perkins Local Plan
Update (LPU) development and there is little evidence of a system of support in the development and
implementation of the LPU.
It was suggested in interviews with staff that some Medford Vocational Technical High School
students are reported in SIMS as Medford High School students after ninth grade. Data analysis does
show "movement" between the two schools, consisting primarily of students with disabilities.
The data and financial review that was conducted by K.P. Marshall Associates PC CPAs found
several problematic areas. Please refer to the draft financial and data review report that was sent to
Superintendent Belson by Jeffrey Wheeler, State Director of Career/Vocational Technical Education
on July 12, 2005.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 22
The district uses Perkins funds in accordance with statutory fund-use rules including
supplement not supplant provisions. Perkins Sections 135, 3114
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Based on interviews with administration, while there is a Business Manager, as of February 2005,
there is no longer someone responsible for fiscal oversight and management of grants.
The data and financial review that was conducted by K.P. Marshall Associates PC CPAs found
several problematic areas. Please refer to the draft financial and data review report that was sent to
Superintendent Belson by Jeffrey Wheeler, State Director of Career/Vocational Technical Education
on July 12, 2005.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 139 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
CTE 23
The district has adequate resources to enable the programs to meet current industry and
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations with respect to
facilities, safety, equipment and supplies. Chapter 74 603 CMR 4.03 (8)
Rating: Not Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
The inspection of all 12 shops resulted in the finding that none of the facilities were in full
compliance with the applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations.
Based on observation, interviews and a review of documentation, Medford Vocational Technical High
School lacks adequate resources. When asked if the MVTHS resources were adequate in
consideration of this criterion, an administrative staff member stated, “No” without hesitation.
However, in discussions regarding two recent DOE grant opportunities, it was stated that MVTHS
chose not to apply, viewing the grant application process as largely “political” and favoring the
regional vocational high schools.
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
IX. RECORD KEEPING
Legal Standard
ELE 18
Records of LEP Students
1. Cumulative records of English language learners are maintained in a
confidential fashion, as required by the Massachusetts Student Record
Regulations, and are available to parents upon request.
2. LEP student records include:
(a) home language survey;
(b) results of tests and evaluations, including, MELA-O, previous
LAS-R and –W, MEPA, MCAS, or other tests chosen by the Board
of Education;
(c) information about students’ previous school experiences;
(d) copies of progress reports and report cards;
(e) evidence of follow-up monitoring (if applicable);
(f) documentation of a parent’s notice to “opt-out” of English learner
education; and
(g) Individual Student Success Plans for students who have failed
MCAS, if the district is required to complete plans for non-LEP
students.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 140 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
ENGLISH LEARNER EDUCATION
IX. RECORD KEEPING
Legal Standard
Authority: 603 CMR 23.05, 23.07; c 69, § 1I; Title VI
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
The student record review indicates that the following required elements were inconsistently
documented in the individual student’s file:
information about a student’s prior school experience,
documentation and/or evidence of follow-up monitoring activities and
a Student Success Plan for students who have failed the MCAS.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 141 of 152
APPENDIX I:
NUTRITION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Code of Federal Regulations:
7 CFR Parts: 210 National School Lunch Program
215 Special Milk Program for Children
220 School Breakfast Program
227 Nutrition Education and Training Program
245 Determining Eligibility for Free and Reduced Price Meals and Free Milk in Schools
The criteria in this component of the Coordinated Program Review examine whether the
School Food Authority ensures that the requirements for participation in the National
School Lunch, School Breakfast, Special Milk and Commodity School Programs are being
implemented. These requirements specify program responsibilities of local officials in the
areas of program administration, preparation and service of nutritious meals, use of
program funds, program monitoring, reporting and record keeping. The findings included
in this section of the report have been made through on-site activities completed by the
Department’s Nutrition Programs and Services team member.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 142 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
NUTRITION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Legal Standard
NS 1
All free and reduced price and paid lunches claimed for reimbursement are served to
students eligible for free, reduced price and paid lunches respectively; and are
counted, recorded, consolidated and reported through a system which consistently
yields correct claims.
7 CFR 210.18 (g) (1).
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
FREE REDUCED PRICE PROCESS 7CFR 210.7(c)(1)i
 Beginning in the 2005/2006 academic year, the processing of free/reduced price applications and
determination of benefits must be completed by the food service staff. Students either did not have access to
benefits or were incorrectly determined by the school principal that signed as the determining official.

The district’s School Food Authority must have access to centralized data information of students. The
unavailability of centralized information (i.e. enrolled school, sibling information) of each family
application made it difficult to determine the correct eligibility of students. In some cases family members
in different schools were given different eligibility.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
NS 2
Records indicate that lunches claimed for reimbursement within the school food
authority contain food items/components as required by program regulations.
7 CFR 210.18 (g) (2)
Rating: Implemented
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
District Response Required:
No
Page 143 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
NS 3
School Food Authorities account for all revenues and expenditures of their nonprofit
school food service. In order to participate in the NSLP, the School Food Authority
maintains records to demonstrate compliance with program requirements. Retention
of these documents is for three years after the close of the fiscal year to which they
pertain except in cases where audit findings are unresolved.
7CFR210.9 (a) (17); 210.14, 210.15
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
REQUIRED RECORD 7CFR 210.15 VERIFICATION PROCESS
The verification process must be completed more accurately in 2006. The following corrections to the
verification process are required:
 The direct certifications are deducted from the total application count before random sampling is
conducted. All eligible applicants and direct certifications were counted and 3% were chosen from the
Andrews’ School.
 Verification tracker must be completed to document contact with the students’ household and/or updates in
eligibility as a result of verification.
 All income on the free/reduced applications must be verified for accuracy. “Other Income” was not
included in the income verification of one applicant.
 Food Stamp verification needs to consist of a documented letter of eligibility. A Xeroxed copy of an EBT
card is not valid since it does not have an expiration date.
FP-9 FORM
 The signature of the person completing the FP-9 form is required.
 Non-reimbursable lunches need to be documented on the FP-9 form. Adult lunches (faculty and staff), as
well as second lunches that were purchased by students, must be documented but not claimed. Adult
lunches and second lunches were counted as paid lunches at the point of service. A separate cash register
button should be added to designate non-reimbursable lunches.
CLAIM
 The current counting systems used to consolidate the free, reduced, unpaid and paid meals does not yield an
accurate count. It is recommended that the cash registered is utilized with a benefit issuance roster and
eliminate the used of tickets. Please specify the new procedure for meal counting and claiming.
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT - 7CFR 210.14
 Lunch aid assistants’ salaries are paid with the school lunch revenues. Federal Regulations state “revenues
received by the nonprofit school food service are to be used only for the operation or improvement of such
service.” Therefore these lunch aid assistants must be under the supervision of the food service director and
evaluated as with all other staff members within the school food service.
RECORDKEEPING
 Student enrollment records were not accessible making it problematic to complete the attendance
verification by school. Please identify how the school food authority will have access to the required
records.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 144 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
NS 4
The School Food Authority works to strengthen the following school nutrition
program participation and management practices:
a. school nutrition participation
b. nutrition education activities
c. productivity evaluation
7CFR 210.19; 7CFR 220.8; 7CFR 210.9
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
FOOD PRODUCTION RECORDS
 Food production sheets are completed. However, the required USDA forms are not being used. Please
specify district training on the use of the required forms.

BREAKFAST PROGRAM 7 CFR 220
Please establish an accurate point of service for the breakfast program and ensure that all the required
components are taken before the meal is counted.

A monthly menu needs to be constructed for breakfast to ensure that the required components are served
and documented.

The roster must be revised to eliminate the words “free/reduced” to avoid overt identification at the service
line.

A point of service must be established for paid students. The count for paid students was calculated by
dividing the amount of money received by the cost of breakfast.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
NS 5
All eligible students have access to the school food services program.
7 CFR 15b; 7 CFR 210.23(c).
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required:
Yes
Department of Education Findings:
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 145 of 152
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
FREE REDUCED PRICE PROCESS 7CFR 210.7(c)(1)I
 The direct certification process is incomplete. Families who did not receive benefits must be informed of
the direct certification of free eligibility. Please respond by stating a procedure of notification to families of
students directly certified for free eligibility.
 Children from homeless families need to be identified on a signed list from the designated Homeless Liaison
for the approved children to be claimed as free eligible.
COLUMBUS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Certification and Benefit Issuance7CFR 245.2
 Please refer to S-5 to update corrections for application and benefit issuance errors. Please state the date of
corrections in * Date column on S-5 form. Please be advised that according to program regulations,
students whose benefits will be increased must be done within 3 operating days while students whose
benefits will be decreased must be given 10 operating days. Documentation of the change in status,
including the date and the notice to parents, must be maintained. Please also indicate the change in status
on the bottom of the free/reduced application. Please see “Eligibility Guidance for School Meals Manual”
for specific information. Fiscal action may occur.
ROBERTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Certification and Benefit Issuance7CFR 245.2
 Please refer to S-5 to update corrections of application and benefit issuance errors. Please state the dates of
corrections on * Date column on S-5. Please be advised that, according to program regulations, students
whose benefits will be increased must be done within 3 operating days while students whose benefits will be
decreased must be given 10 operating days. Documentation of the change in status, including the date and
the notice to parents, must be maintained. Please also indicate the change in status on the bottom of the
free/reduced application. Please see “Eligibility Guidance for School Meals Manual” for specific
information. Fiscal action may occur.
CRITERION
NUMBER
Legal Standard
NS 6
The School Food Authority ensures that established sanitation and health standards
are implemented. Facilities are properly safeguarded against theft, spoilage and
other loss.
7 CFR 210.13
Rating: Partially Implemented
District Response Required: Yes
Department of Education Findings:
SANITATION AND SAFETY - 7CFR 210.13(a)
 Integrated Pest Management System needs to be established by the district .
TRAINING - 7 CFR 210.19 (a)(3)(4)
 Training is required in the use of fire extinguishers.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 146 of 152
APPENDIX II:
SCHOOL DISTRICT PROFILE INFORMATION
The information which is provided in this Appendix was drawn from data supplied by the
school district. The Department’s visiting team carefully reviewed this data as part of its
planning for the onsite visit and in preparing this Coordinated Program Review Report.
This district-wide information, together with more detailed school building data, is
periodically updated by the school district and is available in an ever current form on the
Department’s internet web site at <http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/>.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 147 of 152
School District Profile Information
Definitions of Terms
Profiles
Introduction
The Massachusetts Department of Education collects information about schools and districts. Some of the
information collected is published in the School and District Profiles. The information provides a
snapshot of the educational picture in communities across the state.
Districts view, add, update and delete their own district and school information over the web to make sure
that the information is as up-to-date and accurate as possible. In addition, the general public will be able
to view Directory information about each school district in the state. Individuals can retrieve for
themselves information such as school personnel, school programs (e.g. School Choice and TBE) and the
location of specialized services such as Special Education Schools, Collaboratives, and Vocational
Training Programs.
The list below provides an explanation of information presented in the Profiles.
The electronic version of this district’s or charter school’s profile information is available at:
http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/home.asp?mode=ot&view=&ot=5
Organization Types
Approved Special Responsible for providing an education for students with disabilities. A school
Education Schools district (LEA) may place a student in an out-of-state program if it believes that such
program is the most appropriate for the student.
Charter School
Public schools that are created by parents, teachers, businesses, and community
leaders and have the freedom to organize their activities around a core mission,
curriculum, or teaching method. Their autonomy gives them the freedom to create
their own budgets and to hire and fire teachers and staff.
Collaborative
Collaboratives are formed through an agreement among two or more school
committees to provide education for their member school systems. Agreements
must be filed with the Commissioner of DOE. A Board representative of each
member school committee manages them.
Collaborative
Programs
Regardless of the size of the individual collaborative, each school provides
programs that its member districts demand.
Private School
A non-publicly funded school that provides educational services directly to
attending students.
Public School
Public schools are administered by a Public School District, and provide educational
services directly to attending students. Expenses are paid by state appropriation.
Public School
An administrative unit responsible for managing primary and secondary school
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 148 of 152
Districts
services within a defined geographical boundary. There can be two types of School
Districts, Operational and Non-Operational district, and expenses are paid by state
appropriation.
The Data
Directory Information
DOE Code:
The DOE Code, also referred to as the Organization Code, is an eight digit numeric code assigned by the
Massachusetts Department of Education to every organization listed in the Directory Profiles, including
every district and school in the Commonwealth. For districts and schools, the first four digits represent
the District Code and the last four digits represent the School Code. Thus the organization code
"02660505" stands for "0266" (Sharon Public Schools) + "0505" (Sharon High). If a form requires the 8digit DOE school code it is calling for the entire organization code.
Prior to the 2001 school year, organization codes contained six digits (three for the district and three for
the school.) With the exception of some special needs schools, the eight digit codes are the same as the
six digit codes with one zero added before the district code and another zero added before the school
code. Thus, Sharon High's old six digit organizational code was 266505.
Please Note: The Department's Organization Code is not the same as the Institution codes assigned by the
College Board for SAT and AP results. Nor is it the same as the NCES code assigned to Massachusetts
schools by the U.S. Department of Education.
Grades/Schools:
This section displays the number and grade range of elementary, middle/junior high and high schools in
the district, as well as the total number of schools in the district and the grade range of the school system.
An elementary range beginning with "PK" indicates the district has pre-kindergarten. A high school range
ending in "13" or "14" indicates the district has a post-graduate program. Kindergarten starting age
indicates the age as of a particular date at which children are eligible to begin kindergarten. NOTE:
District level data only.
Services:

Inter-district Choice: indicates whether students from other districts may enroll in the district
through the state school choice program, which is voluntary and on a space-available basis.

Intra-district Choice: indicates whether the district has a school choice program within the
school district for students who live in the district.

Vocational Education: indicates whether the district operates a Chapter 74 approved vocational
education program.

Transitional Bilingual Education (TBE): indicates whether the district operates a TBE
program. Under Massachusetts law, a district must provide a TBE program in a particular
language if there are 20 or more limited English proficient students in that particular language
group enrolled in the district. Limited English proficient students are students whose first
language is not English and who cannot perform ordinary class work in English.

METCO: indicates whether the district participates in the state METCO program, which
promotes voluntary desegregation by enrolling minority students from Boston and Springfield in
suburban schools.
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 149 of 152
Relationships:

Member of Regional Districts: For local school districts, indicates the name(s) of any academic
and/or vocational regional district(s) of which the local school district is a member. For regional
school districts, indicates the names of member local school districts. A regional school district
provides educational services to more than one town. NOTE: District level data only.
Enrollment/Indicators
Enrollment by Grade
Indicates the enrollment for students in grades Pre-kindergarten (PK), kindergarten through 12,
Special Education beyond grade 12 (SP), Career and Technical Education beyond grade 12 (CT)
for the listed school year.
Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity
Indicates the percent of enrollment by race/ethnicity for the listed school year. The reporting
categories are those used by the U.S. Bureau of the Census.
Selected Populations
Indicates the percent of enrollment represented by students in special education programs*,
students who are limited English proficient, and students eligible to receive free or reduced price
lunch*. Data are for the listed school year.
Dropout Rate:
Indicates the percentage of students in grades 9-12 who dropped out of school between July 1 and
June 30 prior to the listed year and who did not return to school by October 1. Dropouts are
defined as students who leave school prior to graduation for reasons other than transfer to another
school.
Children Attending Public Schools
Indicates the percent of school-age children in a city or town attending public schools, for the
listed school years. NOTE: District level data only.
Attendance/Exclusions:
Attendance rate indicates the average percentage of enrolled students, (grades 1-12), present in
school for the listed school year. Student Exclusion (count) indicates the number of student
exclusions that occurred during the listed school year. An exclusion is defined as the removal of a
student for disciplinary purposes permanently, indefinitely or for more than ten consecutive
school days. Student Exclusion (rate) indicates the rate of exclusions per 1000 students.
Technology:
Indicates the number of students for every one computer and the percent of classrooms with
Internet access. Data are for the listed school year; "DNR" appears for schools and districts that
did not yet report data.
Plans of High School Graduates:
Indicates the post-graduate intentions of students for the listed school year.
Test Results
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS):

Shows percentage of students at each performance level for the current year

Select a year to view past year's performance level data
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 150 of 152

Select annual comparisons or the

For 2002 only: view Cycle II Performance Rating Reports

For 2001 only: select a 'Grade and Subject' to view test item analysis data
icon for a graphical display of MCAS results
SAT: The district or school's SAT results are displayed for the listed years.
Finance - District level data only.
Per Pupil Expenditures: are calculated by dividing a district's operating costs by its average pupil
membership. Operating costs include expenditures for administration, instruction, pupil services,
transportation, plant maintenance, and fixed charges. These costs do not include capital outlay and longterm interest on school debt. Average pupil membership includes students who receive services in the
district's schools, as well as students receiving home or hospital instruction. Data for regular education,
special education, bilingual education and vocational education students are provided in addition to the
total for all day programs, for the listed school years.
Teacher Salary: total teaching salaries, divided by the number of full-time equivalent teachers, equals
the average teacher salary.
Foundation Budget Spending Comparison: The education reform act established a foundation budget
for each school district. This budget represents the minimum level of spending needed to provide an
adequate education for the district's students. The foundation budget is made up of 19 separate categories.
The chart shows the district's actual spending in each category for the listed school year as a percentage of
the district's foundation budget. If the percentage exceeds 100%, the district spent more in the category
than suggested by the foundation budget. If the percentage is less than 100%, the district spent less.
Significant variations between local spending and the foundation budget, or between local spending and
the statewide averages, should be reviewed closely. In some cases, the differences may be due to unique
circumstances and needs within the district. In other cases, the differences may suggest potential areas for
review and improvement.
****************
This Coordinated Program Review Final Report is also available at:
http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/reports/ .
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 151 of 152
SE, MOA, TI, SDFS, CTE, ELE, N - 2005
File Name:
Medford Public Schools CPR Final Report 2005.doc
Last Revised on:
January 6, 2006
Prepared by:
DGF; POM/GKH
Medford Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Final Report
Page 152 of 152